3 ms·
That presumes some quantifiable, precisely and accurately measurable metric, which does not exist in any context. For example, there is no test in existence th
by TameAntelope 4y ago
That presumes some quantifiable, precisely and accurately measurable metric, which does not exist in any context.
For example, there is no test in existence that accurately measures "giftedness" in children.
- sokoloff 4y agoHow is qualification already being done today, such that the set of people qualified is larger than the available seats? Is there no adjustment whatsoever possible to that process? If the people running that process had had a slightly tighter set of criteria, would the outward appearance be dramatically different than the path they took to get to the "slightly too many qualified" condition?
- TameAntelope 4y agoThere is no adjustment whatsoever possible that will accurately further qualify/disqualify students from a gifted program, that is correct. Simply "tightening" the existing fuzzy criteria will only further arbitrarily limit qualified students.
- sokoloff 4y agoThat's exactly my point. There's a system today that has some amount of arbitrariness to it. Tweaking that system slightly is almost surely arbitrariness-preserving, likely not increasing or decreasing it significantly.
- TameAntelope 4y agoMy point is that it's increasing the arbitrariness by further constricting the qualified students pool. Instead, accept they're all qualified insofar as they would maximally benefit from advanced lessons, and favor students for whom this may be their only opportunity to get ahead.