2 ms·

I see two issues with "gifted students" in modern education: 1) some school systems see them as critical to "raising up" other students around them, but I neve

I see two issues with "gifted students" in modern education: 1) some school systems see them as critical to "raising up" other students around them, but I never see any analyses as to if this "holds down" the gifted student's development. 2) I've read that students learn a huge proportion of things from their peers. That implies that true gifted education involves comingling a sufficient population of gifted students of the same rough age range among each other. 3) gifted students really benefit from "gifted" teachers. They don't necessarily need deep PhDs in academic subjects, more they just need to be "broadly smart". #1 sounds like it sucks for the gifted, especially with the substantial undercurrent of anti-intellectualism in American education and the specter of bullying. Maybe in a day of 7-8 classes you do gifted + nongifted intermixing for 1-2 classes at once. #2 needs a sufficient population of gifted students #3 is really hit or miss in schools All three of those are why class conscious parents pay a lot of attention to the school district of a school, and are defensive of other students coming into "good" school districts. Also, per "The Bell Curve", smart people tend to be well-off, and so the specter of NIMBYism and housing exclusion rears its head over education. Deep learning in traditional subjects is the default of gifted, but I agree that what is needed (as hinted at in breadth-smart teachers) is breadth-first learning. Because unfortunately gifted students have their passions decided for them: You're going to get good grades! If my kid is gifted, and based on the inheritability of IQ, he probably will be, I'm not subjecting him to acceleration. It'll probably take some degree of home schooling instead. The only acceleration I'd be in favor of is skipping Junior/Senior high school years and going part time to local colleges. Accelerate maybe 1-2 grades tops in specific things.

wheelinsupial 5y ago
I think there is some evidence for the benefits of acceleration that comes from an Australian study of gifted students that you may be interested in investigating. (By no means am I gifted, and it's entirely possible that I'm mischaracterizing or misunderstanding the results.) The book is Exceptionally Gifted Children", 2nd edition, by Miraca Gross. An excerpt can be found at [1]. There are some previous HN comments that discuss this including [2], which names Terrence Tao, UCLA math prof, as one of the participants in the study. Two passages that I think highlight the extremes both in acceleration and outcome are: “… 17 of the 60 young people were radically accelerated. None has regrets. Indeed, several say they would probably have preferred to accelerate still further or to have started earlier…. The majority entered college between ages 11 and 15. Several won scholarships to attend prestigious universi- ties in Australia or overseas. All have graduated with extremely high grades and, in most cases, university prizes for exemplary achieve- ment. All 17 are characterized by a passionate love of learning and almost all have gone on to obtain their Ph.D.s.” “The remaining 33 young people were retained, for the duration of their schooling,… Two dropped out of high school and a number have dropped out of university. Several more have had ongoing difficul- ties at university,…” [1] https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ746290.pdf https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ746290.pdf [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11510032 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11510032

wheelinsupial 5y ago

I think there is some evidence for the benefits of acceleration that comes from an Australian study of gifted students that you may be interested in investigating. (By no means am I gifted, and it's entirely possible that I'm mischaracterizing or misunderstanding the results.) The book is Exceptionally Gifted Children", 2nd edition, by Miraca Gross. An excerpt can be found at [1]. There are some previous HN comments that discuss this including [2], which names Terrence Tao, UCLA math prof, as one of the participants in the study. Two passages that I think highlight the extremes both in acceleration and outcome are: “… 17 of the 60 young people were radically accelerated. None has regrets. Indeed, several say they would probably have preferred to accelerate still further or to have started earlier…. The majority entered college between ages 11 and 15. Several won scholarships to attend prestigious universi- ties in Australia or overseas. All have graduated with extremely high grades and, in most cases, university prizes for exemplary achieve- ment. All 17 are characterized by a passionate love of learning and almost all have gone on to obtain their Ph.D.s.” “The remaining 33 young people were retained, for the duration of their schooling,… Two dropped out of high school and a number have dropped out of university. Several more have had ongoing difficul- ties at university,…” [1] https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ746290.pdf https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ746290.pdf [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11510032 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11510032