3 ms·

Are you addressing the my statement relative to the GP? They are making the elitist assertion that the gifted kids should be separated from the chaff. Having be

Are you addressing the my statement relative to the GP? They are making the elitist assertion that the gifted kids should be separated from the chaff. Having been in gifted programs, I have not found the removal of "underperformers" to be anything other than classism.

s1artibartfast 4y ago
I agree that gifted kids should be "separated from the chaff". I don't see how you reconcile your belief that students should go at their own pace with the idea that students should not be separated. Lack of separation forces all students to progress at the same rate, either high or low. Having been in gifted tracks and standard tracks, I saw a clear difference in the capabilities of students and coursework. If I had been forced to stay in the standard track, I would prefer to drop out. Last, I reject your idea that no student can underperform. At best it is a meaningless empty statement. At worst it is a delusional denial that any differences or lines of comparison exist. Nobody is talented, untalented, tall, short, fast, slow. They just are what they are, unique and incomparable. There is absolutely a class component to gifted programs, but the vast majority of the time this results from the additional support and nurturing upper class parents give their children. I don't think egalitarianism is a sufficient rationale for stifling and handicapping the progress of those children.
- nerpderp82 4y ago
  > At best it is a meaningless empty statement. At worst it is a delusional denial that any differences or lines of comparison exist. Nobody is talented, untalented, tall, short, fast, slow. They just are what they are, unique and incomparable. Disingenuous hot take, you are putting words in my mouth. Done.
  - s1artibartfast 4y ago
    I gave a range of possibilities and my genuine opinion on them. I'm putting words in my mouth, not yours. I'm not the one boldly claiming it is impossible for students to underperform.

s1artibartfast 4y ago

I agree that gifted kids should be "separated from the chaff". I don't see how you reconcile your belief that students should go at their own pace with the idea that students should not be separated. Lack of separation forces all students to progress at the same rate, either high or low. Having been in gifted tracks and standard tracks, I saw a clear difference in the capabilities of students and coursework. If I had been forced to stay in the standard track, I would prefer to drop out. Last, I reject your idea that no student can underperform. At best it is a meaningless empty statement. At worst it is a delusional denial that any differences or lines of comparison exist. Nobody is talented, untalented, tall, short, fast, slow. They just are what they are, unique and incomparable. There is absolutely a class component to gifted programs, but the vast majority of the time this results from the additional support and nurturing upper class parents give their children. I don't think egalitarianism is a sufficient rationale for stifling and handicapping the progress of those children.

nerpderp82 4y ago
> At best it is a meaningless empty statement. At worst it is a delusional denial that any differences or lines of comparison exist. Nobody is talented, untalented, tall, short, fast, slow. They just are what they are, unique and incomparable. Disingenuous hot take, you are putting words in my mouth. Done.
- s1artibartfast 4y ago
  I gave a range of possibilities and my genuine opinion on them. I'm putting words in my mouth, not yours. I'm not the one boldly claiming it is impossible for students to underperform.