5 ms·

Vancouver School Board Is Eliminating Honors Programs

22 points by version_five 5y ago

chickenpotpie 5y ago
Would be curious if anyone has any studies supporting either arrangement. I remember hearing from a lot of professors that the average learning of a group grows when you mix people of different skill levels and that splitting classes on skills leaves everyone but the top students far worse off.
- entityDev 5y ago
  Sure, it may raise the skill levels of one group and at the cost of another group who is held back because of the pace.
  - chickenpotpie 5y ago
    But shouldn’t public education be dedicated to make society as a whole more intelligent and not a few individuals who are “gifted?” Doesn’t society benefit much more that way?
    - entityDev 5y ago
      Yes, but not at the expense of holding other people back. Trust me, being asked to play 'second fiddle' so that someone else can have the same 'outcome' but without doing the work, is far more discouraging and damaging to those who put in the work. Merit, and hard work needs to be recognized, not ignored.
      - chickenpotpie 5y ago
        You just echoed your last point and school already has a method for recognizing hard work, grades.
        nscalf 5y ago
        So does the work load and pace stay at the average classes setting? Or does it scale up to the honors classes and leave more kids behind? Getting an A in an honors class is more valuable than an A in a regular class, just like how placing first in the olympics is more prestigious than first at the county meet.
E-Reverance 5y ago
As someone who is graduating from the IB program and who had previously taken honors, ironically enough, I see this as beneficial. The main value of public school is interacting with a diverse group of people, but in IB and honors the students were too (relatively speaking) anti-social and self-similar. In 9th grade I made more friends in my P.E class because it was more diverse and not in spite of it. The non-honors students also weren't dumb, they were distracted with enjoying their high-school experience which I find to be commendable. Why not just make school harder but increase grade boundaries just like IB [1]. Additionally most of the IB students were self-learning, so its not like the school is doing much. [1] https://www3.dpcdsb.org/STFXS/Documents/IB-2018-05_Grade_Boundaries.pdf https://www3.dpcdsb.org/STFXS/Documents/IB-2018-05_Grade_Bou... I think a lot of the people who find this to be controversial are people who went to high-school pre-internet dominated learning, and who see honors as something necessary for "brighter" students to be able to succeed.
fatjokes 5y ago
As a former "honors"-program student, I found that the main value of the program was the group of like-minded peers, whom took their educations seriously, were competitive on academics, extracurriculars, and other achievements. The actual material wasn't terribly different than the regular classroom. I had also been in regular classrooms, where the "cool kids" were the ones who weren't "keeners", goofed off in class, who had sexual experiences the earliest or who would drink and do drugs at a young age.
- entityDev 5y ago
  Sacrifices right? While one group goofs off, does the minimum to get by, who for one reason or another are satisfied with mediocre grades... another group is sacrificing these things to develop their skills, it's not just in academia. I know people who worked hard on their Math, others worked hard at the Track/Sports, others worked at music instruments, and other activities and became top in our school. Sure, they had higher nerd status than the rest because they spent more time studying than socializing - but trust me, they didn't miss much.
- chickenpotpie 5y ago
  Counter point: maybe the regular classrooms develop that culture because all the gifted students were removed and it creates an echo chamber and a self fulfilling prophecy.
  - fatjokes 5y ago
    I'm skeptical. If the minority gifted* students could change the culture of the regular classroom the bullied nerd wouldn't be such a trope. *Let's say that by definition, gifted = a small top percentage of students.
    - aaaxyz 5y ago
      You'd be surprised. Having 2-3 gifted students who can explain basic concepts to the "average" kids and help them with assignments takes a significant load off the teachers back (who can then focus on helping kids with serious learning difficulties).
entityDev 5y ago
"equitY = "equal outcome" "inclusive model of education" = "we want to handicap top students" equivalent to participation badges We don't want feelings hurt, and we don't want people to feel that 'they're not good enough' because they didn't work as hard as the honors students do. "Education officials don't like that some higher-achieving students are sorted into environments where they are more likely to succeed than their less-gifted peers, and would prefer to keep everyone officially at the same level to the greatest extent possible" So cut out all the variance, flatten the peaks, normalize the median, who cares if people are held back for the sake of 'equity' Bland mediocrity in our world coming full force. What do some call it? Communism? Social Marxism?
- E-Reverance 5y ago
  >>"we want to handicap top students" Why do you think this is true?
  - entityDev 5y ago
    "Education officials don't like that some higher-achieving students are sorted into environments where they are more likely to succeed than their less-gifted peers, and would prefer to keep everyone officially at the same level to the greatest extent possible."
  - economusty 5y ago
    Because they take away the forum for them to demonstrate their ability. Would you be against ranking students? Then when you apply to college or jobs how would I demonstrate my abilities?
    - entityDev 5y ago
      They would just let you in, I guess and pass you too, because they wouldn't want to hurt your feelings, or hold you back in any way... after all you deserve equal outcome with everyone else regardless of merit, skill or ability right? Scary stuff.
  - 5y ago
fatjokes 5y ago
I'm curious who that one UBC prof is claiming to be victims of the "racist" honors programs. Vancouver is like 80% white or Asian (including South Asian) [1]. The disadvantaged groups in California: Latinos and Blacks, make up <3% of Vancouver in 2016. Aborigines similarly make up 3%. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Metro_Vancouver#Ethnic_origin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Metro_Vancouve...
- E-Reverance 5y ago
  The elephant in the room is that it is mostly moderately wealthy Asians in these classes, but it would be odd to mention that directly. As someone who is neither Asian nor White, I would like there to interact with more Whites, simply because almost all of my peers are Asian as a result of being in these programs. Diversity in Canada is less about a narrative of fixing the past and is more about the fact that diversity in general is cool, so having more Whites also can improve diversity.
throwawaysea 5y ago
Seattle is doing the same thing (see https://reason.com/2020/01/27/seattles-school-system-wants-to-dismantle-its-gifted-programs-this-is-why-school-choice-matters/ https://reason.com/2020/01/27/seattles-school-system-wants-t... and https://reason.com/2020/03/26/seattles-school-system-has-begun-dismantling-its-gifted-programs/ https://reason.com/2020/03/26/seattles-school-system-has-beg...). This is all in the name of “equity” (equality of outcomes) and “justice”, and is in lock step with the political movements we see in other highly progressive cities like Portland and San Francisco. Looking at local dialogue on this from activists, politicians, and educators, I am seeing them label gifted education programs as white supremacist and discriminatory. But the reality is that the separation of good students and bad students is not avoidable. This isn’t a question of unequal resources. Seattle currently spends north of 23K per student per year on its public schools, and despite funding going up dramatically (nearly doubling) in the last decade, parents see no tangible improvements (https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/education/20000-per-student-seattle-schools-spending-surges-but-this-parent-cant-feel-it/ https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/education/20000-pe...). The reality is that unequal outcomes are a function of parenting, core values, innate motivation to work hard, and innate talent (genetics?). This movement to artificial hold back the best students, who deserve something better, is just sacrificing America’s competitiveness on the altar of progressive “justice” agendas.
- entityDev 5y ago
  If anything I personally would have benefited from leaving the classroom behind and put in an advanced learning class, and away from all the distracting BS like drama, popularity, drinking, partying, fooling around.. but alas it was not available to me, and by the time it was, I had no idea it even existed. No one is 'equal' in anything regarding talent, IQ, ability, aptitude and drive (and even popularity), it's impossible equalize all of this without causing major damage across the board.
- E-Reverance 5y ago
  >>white supremacist and discriminatory But this story in particular is about Canada. I know that the professor specifically mentions racism, but this mostly benefits white people, which is fine because it increases diversity.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
failwhaleshark 5y ago
Affirmative Action: Anti-Intellectual Edition: - Eliminate SAT and ACT as admissions criteria - Lower admission standards to where merit doesn't matter - Accept as many student "customers" as possible - Everyone gets an A+ for participation - Graduate everyone - Axe honors programs because they're ableist - Bus the white and Asian gifted kids 3 hours a day to the "magnet" under-performing schools when there's a perfectly good school 0.1 mi / 0.2 km away from them (ask me how I know) - Disband Gifted And Talented programs, because you know, ableism again - Stop offering The College Board - Advanced Placement (AP) exams because it gives smart, dedicated students an "unfair advantage" /s

22 points by version_five 5y ago

Would be curious if anyone has any studies supporting either arrangement. I remember hearing from a lot of professors that the average learning of a group grows when you mix people of different skill levels and that splitting classes on skills leaves everyone but the top students far worse off.

entityDev 5y ago
Sure, it may raise the skill levels of one group and at the cost of another group who is held back because of the pace.
- chickenpotpie 5y ago
  But shouldn’t public education be dedicated to make society as a whole more intelligent and not a few individuals who are “gifted?” Doesn’t society benefit much more that way?
  - entityDev 5y ago
    Yes, but not at the expense of holding other people back. Trust me, being asked to play 'second fiddle' so that someone else can have the same 'outcome' but without doing the work, is far more discouraging and damaging to those who put in the work. Merit, and hard work needs to be recognized, not ignored.
    - chickenpotpie 5y ago
      You just echoed your last point and school already has a method for recognizing hard work, grades.
      - nscalf 5y ago
        So does the work load and pace stay at the average classes setting? Or does it scale up to the honors classes and leave more kids behind? Getting an A in an honors class is more valuable than an A in a regular class, just like how placing first in the olympics is more prestigious than first at the county meet.

E-Reverance 5y ago

As someone who is graduating from the IB program and who had previously taken honors, ironically enough, I see this as beneficial. The main value of public school is interacting with a diverse group of people, but in IB and honors the students were too (relatively speaking) anti-social and self-similar. In 9th grade I made more friends in my P.E class because it was more diverse and not in spite of it. The non-honors students also weren't dumb, they were distracted with enjoying their high-school experience which I find to be commendable. Why not just make school harder but increase grade boundaries just like IB [1]. Additionally most of the IB students were self-learning, so its not like the school is doing much. [1] https://www3.dpcdsb.org/STFXS/Documents/IB-2018-05_Grade_Boundaries.pdf https://www3.dpcdsb.org/STFXS/Documents/IB-2018-05_Grade_Bou... I think a lot of the people who find this to be controversial are people who went to high-school pre-internet dominated learning, and who see honors as something necessary for "brighter" students to be able to succeed.

fatjokes 5y ago

As a former "honors"-program student, I found that the main value of the program was the group of like-minded peers, whom took their educations seriously, were competitive on academics, extracurriculars, and other achievements. The actual material wasn't terribly different than the regular classroom. I had also been in regular classrooms, where the "cool kids" were the ones who weren't "keeners", goofed off in class, who had sexual experiences the earliest or who would drink and do drugs at a young age.

entityDev 5y ago
Sacrifices right? While one group goofs off, does the minimum to get by, who for one reason or another are satisfied with mediocre grades... another group is sacrificing these things to develop their skills, it's not just in academia. I know people who worked hard on their Math, others worked hard at the Track/Sports, others worked at music instruments, and other activities and became top in our school. Sure, they had higher nerd status than the rest because they spent more time studying than socializing - but trust me, they didn't miss much.
chickenpotpie 5y ago
Counter point: maybe the regular classrooms develop that culture because all the gifted students were removed and it creates an echo chamber and a self fulfilling prophecy.
- fatjokes 5y ago
  I'm skeptical. If the minority gifted* students could change the culture of the regular classroom the bullied nerd wouldn't be such a trope. *Let's say that by definition, gifted = a small top percentage of students.
  - aaaxyz 5y ago
    You'd be surprised. Having 2-3 gifted students who can explain basic concepts to the "average" kids and help them with assignments takes a significant load off the teachers back (who can then focus on helping kids with serious learning difficulties).

entityDev 5y ago

"equitY = "equal outcome" "inclusive model of education" = "we want to handicap top students" equivalent to participation badges We don't want feelings hurt, and we don't want people to feel that 'they're not good enough' because they didn't work as hard as the honors students do. "Education officials don't like that some higher-achieving students are sorted into environments where they are more likely to succeed than their less-gifted peers, and would prefer to keep everyone officially at the same level to the greatest extent possible" So cut out all the variance, flatten the peaks, normalize the median, who cares if people are held back for the sake of 'equity' Bland mediocrity in our world coming full force. What do some call it? Communism? Social Marxism?

E-Reverance 5y ago
>>"we want to handicap top students" Why do you think this is true?
- entityDev 5y ago
  "Education officials don't like that some higher-achieving students are sorted into environments where they are more likely to succeed than their less-gifted peers, and would prefer to keep everyone officially at the same level to the greatest extent possible."
- economusty 5y ago
  Because they take away the forum for them to demonstrate their ability. Would you be against ranking students? Then when you apply to college or jobs how would I demonstrate my abilities?
  - entityDev 5y ago
    They would just let you in, I guess and pass you too, because they wouldn't want to hurt your feelings, or hold you back in any way... after all you deserve equal outcome with everyone else regardless of merit, skill or ability right? Scary stuff.
- 5y ago

fatjokes 5y ago

I'm curious who that one UBC prof is claiming to be victims of the "racist" honors programs. Vancouver is like 80% white or Asian (including South Asian) [1]. The disadvantaged groups in California: Latinos and Blacks, make up <3% of Vancouver in 2016. Aborigines similarly make up 3%. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Metro_Vancouver#Ethnic_origin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Metro_Vancouve...

E-Reverance 5y ago
The elephant in the room is that it is mostly moderately wealthy Asians in these classes, but it would be odd to mention that directly. As someone who is neither Asian nor White, I would like there to interact with more Whites, simply because almost all of my peers are Asian as a result of being in these programs. Diversity in Canada is less about a narrative of fixing the past and is more about the fact that diversity in general is cool, so having more Whites also can improve diversity.

throwawaysea 5y ago

Seattle is doing the same thing (see https://reason.com/2020/01/27/seattles-school-system-wants-to-dismantle-its-gifted-programs-this-is-why-school-choice-matters/ https://reason.com/2020/01/27/seattles-school-system-wants-t... and https://reason.com/2020/03/26/seattles-school-system-has-begun-dismantling-its-gifted-programs/ https://reason.com/2020/03/26/seattles-school-system-has-beg...). This is all in the name of “equity” (equality of outcomes) and “justice”, and is in lock step with the political movements we see in other highly progressive cities like Portland and San Francisco. Looking at local dialogue on this from activists, politicians, and educators, I am seeing them label gifted education programs as white supremacist and discriminatory. But the reality is that the separation of good students and bad students is not avoidable. This isn’t a question of unequal resources. Seattle currently spends north of 23K per student per year on its public schools, and despite funding going up dramatically (nearly doubling) in the last decade, parents see no tangible improvements (https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/education/20000-per-student-seattle-schools-spending-surges-but-this-parent-cant-feel-it/ https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/education/20000-pe...). The reality is that unequal outcomes are a function of parenting, core values, innate motivation to work hard, and innate talent (genetics?). This movement to artificial hold back the best students, who deserve something better, is just sacrificing America’s competitiveness on the altar of progressive “justice” agendas.

entityDev 5y ago
If anything I personally would have benefited from leaving the classroom behind and put in an advanced learning class, and away from all the distracting BS like drama, popularity, drinking, partying, fooling around.. but alas it was not available to me, and by the time it was, I had no idea it even existed. No one is 'equal' in anything regarding talent, IQ, ability, aptitude and drive (and even popularity), it's impossible equalize all of this without causing major damage across the board.
E-Reverance 5y ago
>>white supremacist and discriminatory But this story in particular is about Canada. I know that the professor specifically mentions racism, but this mostly benefits white people, which is fine because it increases diversity.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

failwhaleshark 5y ago

Affirmative Action: Anti-Intellectual Edition: - Eliminate SAT and ACT as admissions criteria - Lower admission standards to where merit doesn't matter - Accept as many student "customers" as possible - Everyone gets an A+ for participation - Graduate everyone - Axe honors programs because they're ableist - Bus the white and Asian gifted kids 3 hours a day to the "magnet" under-performing schools when there's a perfectly good school 0.1 mi / 0.2 km away from them (ask me how I know) - Disband Gifted And Talented programs, because you know, ableism again - Stop offering The College Board - Advanced Placement (AP) exams because it gives smart, dedicated students an "unfair advantage" /s