11 ms·

This is the result of woke policies in public schools. They already removed gifted programs and magnet schools because most of the students benefiting from the

This is the result of woke policies in public schools. They already removed gifted programs and magnet schools because most of the students benefiting from the programs were White and Asian (more Asian). For the same reason they are trying to remove calculus [1][2]. And the UC system will stop accepting SAT scores [3]. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/04/us/california-math-curriculum-guidelines.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/04/us/california-math-curric... [2] https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2021-05-20/california-controversial-math-overhaul-focuses-on-equity https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2021-05-20/californ... [3] https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2021-11-18/uc-slams-door-on-sat-and-all-standardized-admissions-tests https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2021-11-18/uc-slams...

zozbot234 5y ago
The whole "woke" angle is just a case of admittedly convenient misdirection. Government schools have always consistently pushed for mediocrity and getting rid of any sort of accountability re: educational outcomes, and this latest instance is no different. Standards and accountability can only be achieved and sustained via meaningful competition (such as 'magnet' schools striving to compete with private educational offerings).
- google234123 5y ago
  How is it misdirection if most of the people really pushing this are “woke”?
  - mhb 5y ago
    Because the root cause is that the government has a monopoly on public schools. It is only a recent development that the indoctrination of the captive audience has become enticing for woke proselytizers.
    - simplestats 5y ago
      The issue with gifted children isn't about indoctrinating them to whatever beliefs. It's the destructive belief that high academic achievement is the result of some unfair "privilege" which they seek to counter by limiting opportunities for advancement.
      - faeriechangling 5y ago
        Being able to attain high academic achievement IS privilege itself, a far far more real one than most privileges people jaw on about. Your standardized test scores to a large extent determine your quality of life. On some level it’s positively shocking that gifted classes have lasted as long as they have. Looked at from a thousand mile out view a TON of the woke agenda is direct and indirect attacks on those that perform well on standardized tests.
        avar 5y ago
        Why would having "gifted" classes detract from other students? In the case of OP's daughter giving her permission to simply skip math class and self-tutor in an empty classroom (by e.g. self-studying a more advanced textbook) would probably be an improvement over having to sit through a class that's below her level. Once you do that less "privileged" students also benefit, since the teaching resources being spent on that bored student will be freed up to focus on the smaller class of students that need more assistance. I don't see why it's a given that this is guaranteed to result in worse outcomes by any measure, even "woke" ones that might consider it a loss if OP's daughter pulls ahead further from the median grade, even if the median also goes up as a result of better spent teaching resources.
        csa 5y ago
        > Why would having "gifted" classes detract from other students? Note that I am a fan of gifted classes, but to answer your question: 1. If you pull out gifted kids from classes with simply “above average” kids, you lower the ceiling of what it means to be “the best”. As a result, the above average kids may not push themselves as hard/far. This concept is common in sports as well — the competition yields higher results. 2. The class that is left, usually an honors class, ends up moving much more slowly. A dirty little secret of teaching is that the pace of a class is limited to roughly the ability level of the bottom third of the class. Any faster, and you have lost so many people that the class can’t self-correct via peer interaction. Any slower, and you cause so many of the high performers to lose interest that motivation becomes an issue. When you pull the gifted kids out of, for example, an honors class, the level of the bottom third of that class often drops precipitously. I personally don’t think that these are good reasons to eliminate gifted classes. I think it points to the need for more effective/efficient differentiated instruction. But that would require good teachers and good administration, and imho those things are extremely difficult to have at scale.
    - yuliyp 5y ago
      In most large cities, there is not a single government which has a monopoly on public schools: there are generally multiple individual school districts which each try to compete for the wealthiest students. That results in some school districts being more amenable toward a focus on gifted programs and some being less so. School boards are subject to elections, which does mean that the priorities of the schools are not homogeneous. Of course there are lots of layers of laws and bureaucracies above school districts that can apply curricula or regulations to temper this, but unlike state governments, where representatives are elected on a slate of issues and tied to political parties, school boards are elected on just 1 issue: how are they going to run the schools.
    - H8crilA 5y ago
      Not true. Most of European schools are govt-run, yet there are pretty good programs for "gifted" people, mainly centered around competitions, culminating in the international IMO and IOI.
      - Viliam1234 5y ago
        A lot of education for gifted people happens outside of school: clubs, correspondence competitions (these days probably all online). Also, gifted people often learn from books.
    - GoblinSlayer 5y ago
      Some governments do hold competitions between public schools. Like https://www.ipho2021.lt/ https://www.ipho2021.lt/ but on a local scale.
    - mlac 5y ago
      The government will always have a monopoly on public schools, that are, by definition, publicly funded by the government.
  - profunctor 5y ago
    What do you mean by woke?
    - google234123 5y ago
      Social media-fueled, very leftwing ideologues. Typically also trying to “cancel” those they disagree with.
MathMonkeyMan 5y ago
What is "woke"?
- Negitivefrags 5y ago
  Generally speaking “woke” means people who believe that “equality of outcome” rather than “equality of opportunity” is the goal.
  - froh 5y ago
    This is not correct. Woke is about perception of disadvantage based on race, inequal opportunity based.
    - krageon 5y ago
      As a term it is barely used except by people that overwhelmingly hate the culture (which as said, does not exist as an entity). Asserting what is true and what is not about the term in general doesn't work as a consequence and we should most closely try to approximate what the speaker in question means. I think you covered that well, but for a casual non-native reader it is important to have this expressed.
      - froh 5y ago
        I appreciate the detail!
  - Robin_Message 5y ago
    What does it mean to give "equality of opportunity" to a black child in America, who's ancestors were enslaved, who's great grandparent was lynched, who's grandparents couldn't vote, who's parents couldn't go to university because of discrimination? Who lives in a country where three white men can murder a black jogger, and it requires a international outcry for the police to prosecute? As I understand "woke", it does mean trying to equalise "opportunity"; it just recognises that "opportunity" in the sense of "something offered" is not the same as "opportunity" in the sense of "the chance to do well", and tries to correct that. In this particular case, does it make sense to take away gifted and talented programmes? There is clearly equality of opportunity offered. But a woke response might be to also identify individuals in disadvantaged groups who would be at that level were it not for their disadvantage and help them get there.
hnbad 5y ago
Can you clarify what you think bringing a meaningless jab like "woke" into this discussion actually adds to the conversation?
SamoyedFurFluff 5y ago
With some quibbles: the gifted programs aren’t being phased out entirely, assessments are just being moved to a state where they’re less gamified. The reason why note white and Asian people were on them was because they could pay to cram the gifted assessments, which then poisoned the whole program because those kids weren’t actually gifted. SAT similarly is a pretty bad indicator of intelligence because there’s a pipeline of gaming them.

zozbot234 5y ago

The whole "woke" angle is just a case of admittedly convenient misdirection. Government schools have always consistently pushed for mediocrity and getting rid of any sort of accountability re: educational outcomes, and this latest instance is no different. Standards and accountability can only be achieved and sustained via meaningful competition (such as 'magnet' schools striving to compete with private educational offerings).

google234123 5y ago
How is it misdirection if most of the people really pushing this are “woke”?
- mhb 5y ago
  Because the root cause is that the government has a monopoly on public schools. It is only a recent development that the indoctrination of the captive audience has become enticing for woke proselytizers.
  - simplestats 5y ago
    The issue with gifted children isn't about indoctrinating them to whatever beliefs. It's the destructive belief that high academic achievement is the result of some unfair "privilege" which they seek to counter by limiting opportunities for advancement.
    - faeriechangling 5y ago
      Being able to attain high academic achievement IS privilege itself, a far far more real one than most privileges people jaw on about. Your standardized test scores to a large extent determine your quality of life. On some level it’s positively shocking that gifted classes have lasted as long as they have. Looked at from a thousand mile out view a TON of the woke agenda is direct and indirect attacks on those that perform well on standardized tests.
      - avar 5y ago
        Why would having "gifted" classes detract from other students? In the case of OP's daughter giving her permission to simply skip math class and self-tutor in an empty classroom (by e.g. self-studying a more advanced textbook) would probably be an improvement over having to sit through a class that's below her level. Once you do that less "privileged" students also benefit, since the teaching resources being spent on that bored student will be freed up to focus on the smaller class of students that need more assistance. I don't see why it's a given that this is guaranteed to result in worse outcomes by any measure, even "woke" ones that might consider it a loss if OP's daughter pulls ahead further from the median grade, even if the median also goes up as a result of better spent teaching resources.
        csa 5y ago
        > Why would having "gifted" classes detract from other students? Note that I am a fan of gifted classes, but to answer your question: 1. If you pull out gifted kids from classes with simply “above average” kids, you lower the ceiling of what it means to be “the best”. As a result, the above average kids may not push themselves as hard/far. This concept is common in sports as well — the competition yields higher results. 2. The class that is left, usually an honors class, ends up moving much more slowly. A dirty little secret of teaching is that the pace of a class is limited to roughly the ability level of the bottom third of the class. Any faster, and you have lost so many people that the class can’t self-correct via peer interaction. Any slower, and you cause so many of the high performers to lose interest that motivation becomes an issue. When you pull the gifted kids out of, for example, an honors class, the level of the bottom third of that class often drops precipitously. I personally don’t think that these are good reasons to eliminate gifted classes. I think it points to the need for more effective/efficient differentiated instruction. But that would require good teachers and good administration, and imho those things are extremely difficult to have at scale.
  - yuliyp 5y ago
    In most large cities, there is not a single government which has a monopoly on public schools: there are generally multiple individual school districts which each try to compete for the wealthiest students. That results in some school districts being more amenable toward a focus on gifted programs and some being less so. School boards are subject to elections, which does mean that the priorities of the schools are not homogeneous. Of course there are lots of layers of laws and bureaucracies above school districts that can apply curricula or regulations to temper this, but unlike state governments, where representatives are elected on a slate of issues and tied to political parties, school boards are elected on just 1 issue: how are they going to run the schools.
  - H8crilA 5y ago
    Not true. Most of European schools are govt-run, yet there are pretty good programs for "gifted" people, mainly centered around competitions, culminating in the international IMO and IOI.
    - Viliam1234 5y ago
      A lot of education for gifted people happens outside of school: clubs, correspondence competitions (these days probably all online). Also, gifted people often learn from books.
  - GoblinSlayer 5y ago
    Some governments do hold competitions between public schools. Like https://www.ipho2021.lt/ https://www.ipho2021.lt/ but on a local scale.
  - mlac 5y ago
    The government will always have a monopoly on public schools, that are, by definition, publicly funded by the government.
- profunctor 5y ago
  What do you mean by woke?
  - google234123 5y ago
    Social media-fueled, very leftwing ideologues. Typically also trying to “cancel” those they disagree with.

MathMonkeyMan 5y ago

What is "woke"?

Negitivefrags 5y ago
Generally speaking “woke” means people who believe that “equality of outcome” rather than “equality of opportunity” is the goal.
- froh 5y ago
  This is not correct. Woke is about perception of disadvantage based on race, inequal opportunity based.
  - krageon 5y ago
    As a term it is barely used except by people that overwhelmingly hate the culture (which as said, does not exist as an entity). Asserting what is true and what is not about the term in general doesn't work as a consequence and we should most closely try to approximate what the speaker in question means. I think you covered that well, but for a casual non-native reader it is important to have this expressed.
    - froh 5y ago
      I appreciate the detail!
- Robin_Message 5y ago
  What does it mean to give "equality of opportunity" to a black child in America, who's ancestors were enslaved, who's great grandparent was lynched, who's grandparents couldn't vote, who's parents couldn't go to university because of discrimination? Who lives in a country where three white men can murder a black jogger, and it requires a international outcry for the police to prosecute? As I understand "woke", it does mean trying to equalise "opportunity"; it just recognises that "opportunity" in the sense of "something offered" is not the same as "opportunity" in the sense of "the chance to do well", and tries to correct that. In this particular case, does it make sense to take away gifted and talented programmes? There is clearly equality of opportunity offered. But a woke response might be to also identify individuals in disadvantaged groups who would be at that level were it not for their disadvantage and help them get there.

hnbad 5y ago

Can you clarify what you think bringing a meaningless jab like "woke" into this discussion actually adds to the conversation?

SamoyedFurFluff 5y ago

With some quibbles: the gifted programs aren’t being phased out entirely, assessments are just being moved to a state where they’re less gamified. The reason why note white and Asian people were on them was because they could pay to cram the gifted assessments, which then poisoned the whole program because those kids weren’t actually gifted. SAT similarly is a pretty bad indicator of intelligence because there’s a pipeline of gaming them.