7 ms·

My guess is the intention is to be able to say that the framework benefits disadvantaged people. But like almost any policy like this all it does at best is pul

My guess is the intention is to be able to say that the framework benefits disadvantaged people. But like almost any policy like this all it does at best is pull down people at the top, at worst pulls down everyone making the situation worse for everyone. You can have separation of education by ability, and progress, or you can have equality, and everyone being pulled down to the same low level. And suffering for everyone. You can’t have both. Take it from someone who has direct experience with communism, which is the same mentality that drives this.

pessimizer 4y ago
> You can have separation of education by ability, and progress, or you can have equality, and everyone being pulled down to the same low level. This seems a little off. What we're talking about (and what it seems like you're defending) is directing more resources towards the most gifted. It's fine to believe that, but it's an argument to give the most to those who have the most. Nobody is pulling anyone down, and communists are as happy to grant power and resources to those with aptitude and connections as capitalists are. edit: with the constant attacks on teachers, it might be more realistic to stop aiming for calculus in high school. Any kid who manages it within a gutted public system would have gotten there anyway, no matter what situation they found themselves in. They can download calculus books and calculus lectures now; with the internet a feral education is within everyone's reach.
- hellisothers 4y ago
  As the parent of a child who is gifted at math this is wrong on so many levels, I’ll just state one. My kid only has so much time he can genuinely focus on “school work” in a day, why should he be forced to spend “school” time on things wildly beneath his level and then come home and spend his own time on additional “school” type work?
- ralph84 4y ago
  How is it directing more resources to allow students to take courses at their level? It's not like you have to pay high school math teachers a higher salary to teach calculus. Your typical public high school in California has 1,000+ students. With that many students it's not going to be hard to find 20-30 students to register for a calculus class. It's not like you're running a special private class just for a few gifted students.
- nullc 4y ago
  Every student needs and should be entitled to an education that pushes their abilities. Without it, they won't learn to put in the effort required to be successful even at a level that doesn't make use of their enhanced abilities. This might mean that there are additional costs for 'gifted' students. But that's no different than there being additional costs for mentally less advanced students: no matter what the students are, providing an education fit to their needs has costs... and a failure to provide it creates inequality when the most privileged families move their children (or relocate entirely) to places that will provide a more suitable education.
jdkee 4y ago
Harrison Bergeron by Vonnegut describes this quite well. See http://www.tnellen.com/cybereng/harrison.html http://www.tnellen.com/cybereng/harrison.html

pessimizer 4y ago

> You can have separation of education by ability, and progress, or you can have equality, and everyone being pulled down to the same low level. This seems a little off. What we're talking about (and what it seems like you're defending) is directing more resources towards the most gifted. It's fine to believe that, but it's an argument to give the most to those who have the most. Nobody is pulling anyone down, and communists are as happy to grant power and resources to those with aptitude and connections as capitalists are. edit: with the constant attacks on teachers, it might be more realistic to stop aiming for calculus in high school. Any kid who manages it within a gutted public system would have gotten there anyway, no matter what situation they found themselves in. They can download calculus books and calculus lectures now; with the internet a feral education is within everyone's reach.

hellisothers 4y ago
As the parent of a child who is gifted at math this is wrong on so many levels, I’ll just state one. My kid only has so much time he can genuinely focus on “school work” in a day, why should he be forced to spend “school” time on things wildly beneath his level and then come home and spend his own time on additional “school” type work?
ralph84 4y ago
How is it directing more resources to allow students to take courses at their level? It's not like you have to pay high school math teachers a higher salary to teach calculus. Your typical public high school in California has 1,000+ students. With that many students it's not going to be hard to find 20-30 students to register for a calculus class. It's not like you're running a special private class just for a few gifted students.
nullc 4y ago
Every student needs and should be entitled to an education that pushes their abilities. Without it, they won't learn to put in the effort required to be successful even at a level that doesn't make use of their enhanced abilities. This might mean that there are additional costs for 'gifted' students. But that's no different than there being additional costs for mentally less advanced students: no matter what the students are, providing an education fit to their needs has costs... and a failure to provide it creates inequality when the most privileged families move their children (or relocate entirely) to places that will provide a more suitable education.

jdkee 4y ago

Harrison Bergeron by Vonnegut describes this quite well. See http://www.tnellen.com/cybereng/harrison.html http://www.tnellen.com/cybereng/harrison.html