4 ms·

So logical conclusion, all children are put in isolation from their parents, since we cannot their parents tarnish the children in any way

• sdenton4 6y ago
  That's a straw-man, and I think you know it. I said nothing about isolating children from their parents. I also didn't call parents 'dumb' for not knowing how to manipulate the system on their children's behalf, as you said in your other comment. Parents want the best for their children across the board, but have different ideas of what 'the best' might be, and different access to information and resources for getting there. That doesn't make them 'dumb,' and dismissing them as such means you're not asking questions about what other priorities and/or limitations might be in place. You're applying a label and deciding not to understand what might be behind it. My point is that it's ultimately best to widen the mouth of the funnel to increase the chance of picking up high performers. I tend to think it's better to do this at an institutional level, for a variety of reasons. As a point of reference, I think the California university system has done an excellent job historically of facilitating this kind of thing. The community colleges are cheap and widely accessible, and provide a solid, attainable path into R-1 and R-2 research universities for students who do well. This (and similar efforts to widen access to higher education) had a lot to do with the easy availability knowledge labor in the 70's and 80's throughout California, powering an economic boom and improving class mobility at the same time.