3 ms·

its important to say that the vast majority of kids at the bottom get left behind because of the parents. Parents that aren't involved, don't review homework, d

its important to say that the vast majority of kids at the bottom get left behind because of the parents. Parents that aren't involved, don't review homework, don't instill good study habits, set their kids up for failure. There are plenty of reasons why parents don't get involved. Those reasons range from working too much, to they don't give a shit.

lotsofpulp 6y ago
And parents that work odd hours, multiple jobs, have insecure income streams, and whose parents also suffered the same so they also don’t have the necessary knowledge and network for success.
Grimm1 6y ago
This exactly, as I stated elsewhere I was in the gifted program but because my parents were unable to be involved more thoroughly from both working whether I was in that program or not doesn't really compare to the lack of parental support in terms of how it all worked out for me.
kiba 6y ago
All I am pointing out that gifted kids likely have supportive environment that nurtured their growth, even if it's just parents that can throw money at problems. What happens if you throw societal support at them? They will likely do even better. They will be better educated, have more economic opportunities, more financial support from society, and be more well connected. Meritocratic programs exacerbate inequality and grow the divide between the kids at the top and those at the bottom. Maybe we shouldn't stop doing them, but we need to think about supporting the bottom, such as free lunch, without exception.
- abfan1127 6y ago
  Based on my experiences, many "bottom parents" don't want support, or they've delegated the job of "education" to teachers. Getting parents to care matters. Free lunch doesn't do that. full bellies learn better, but if mom/dad have a "who cares" attitude, that is very likely to flow down to kids. I also acknowledge the challenge of getting people to care. Its no easy feat.

lotsofpulp 6y ago

And parents that work odd hours, multiple jobs, have insecure income streams, and whose parents also suffered the same so they also don’t have the necessary knowledge and network for success.

Grimm1 6y ago

This exactly, as I stated elsewhere I was in the gifted program but because my parents were unable to be involved more thoroughly from both working whether I was in that program or not doesn't really compare to the lack of parental support in terms of how it all worked out for me.

kiba 6y ago

All I am pointing out that gifted kids likely have supportive environment that nurtured their growth, even if it's just parents that can throw money at problems. What happens if you throw societal support at them? They will likely do even better. They will be better educated, have more economic opportunities, more financial support from society, and be more well connected. Meritocratic programs exacerbate inequality and grow the divide between the kids at the top and those at the bottom. Maybe we shouldn't stop doing them, but we need to think about supporting the bottom, such as free lunch, without exception.

abfan1127 6y ago
Based on my experiences, many "bottom parents" don't want support, or they've delegated the job of "education" to teachers. Getting parents to care matters. Free lunch doesn't do that. full bellies learn better, but if mom/dad have a "who cares" attitude, that is very likely to flow down to kids. I also acknowledge the challenge of getting people to care. Its no easy feat.