4 ms·

I find a similar trend with education in general. Some states have phased out programs for gifted students. Instead, many of them aren’t stimulated enough and

I find a similar trend with education in general. Some states have phased out programs for gifted students. Instead, many of them aren’t stimulated enough and end up going down a troubling path (worst case) or they don’t really reach their full potential during those formidable years. Teachers are expected to make the content match the lowest denominator, outside of the occasional exceptional teacher

surfingdino 2y ago
Because making someone think is stupid-shaming and therefore not politically correct.
- monero-xmr 2y ago
  Eventually everyone is tested. I have received perfect looking resumes and cover letters, then you get the person on a call and they are… hopeless. It’s very sad. Who pushed them so far? How did they get the credentials? Who wrote and edited their materials? Eventually the “rubber meets the road” so to speak, and all of the lies and gold stars and platitudes don’t count for anything.
  - kaba0 2y ago
    There are certainly people like that, but there are also exceptionally smart people that just absolutely suck at selling themselves, and you might unknowingly decided the same way in case of both. It’s very hard to fairly evaluate someone. E.g. I had interviews where I 100% know more than one of my interviewers on the specific topic (not bragging, my knowledge is ain’t a high bar), and that gap in this unusual direction made the process very awkward and strange.
    - lanstin 2y ago
      I have only gotten jobs because of people I have worked with before. I have written all kinds of software for all kinds of systems and products but I just don't come across as smart on a first meeting. And to be fair I almost invariably like to chew on a knotty problem for a few days turning it over in my head till I get a feel for it, unless I have already solved a very similar problem; but I only want to solve novel problems. Old problems in software should be solvable easily. The current interviewing process would not hire me unless I had already worked with the deciders before.
      - surfingdino 2y ago
        > Old problems in software should be solvable easily I keep telling people who interview me that this is what APIs, modules, and frameworks are for. They capture good solutions to problems and allow us to move faster and build better software. If they are rude to me I tell them that I thought they were an e-commerce business and should not be solving basic problems in Computer Science.
ZeroGravitas 2y ago
In some ways this supports the point, in others it's the exact opposite. He says spoonfeeding information to people in bite-size chunks is like processed food and it should be hard, but you're saying that information should be spoonfed to 'smart' kids in exactly the right level of difficulty or they'll wreck their lives. Possibly it's like the concept of flow, where the standard suggestion is that things should be not too hard and not too easy, in order to keep your attention, interest and focus. But philosphically, that's just 'spoon-feeding' information in bite-size chunks like processed food, it's just varying the size of the bite to suit the level of the reciever, which again is exactly what he's saying is bad.
Broken_Hippo 2y ago
And so many of those programs were absolutely horrible. I had a lot more homework than my peers and was expected to act more mature. Sorry, but we were all the same age as other kids - we didn't deserve a higher workload (as kids and teens) and we should have been expected to act our age. It was pretty common to make fun of others for not keeping up well enough (struggling not allowed) or for appearing too smart (Not me, but a family member). Some school systems completely separated gifted kids from 'regular' students. By high school, it was obvious that this created some issues communicating with a broader range of folks. There is more than one way to make sure gifted kids get challenged - you don't necessarily need a special class for gifted kids. And you'll need to provide proof for the last one. It is true that they do teach so that the test scores are good - and since funding and jobs are tied to that testing, other things are going to go down. This isn't really making content matching the lowest denominator, though.
- conjectures 2y ago
  Seems geographical/not uniform. In UK some schools just pocket the gifted and talented funds and deliver nothing.
  - Broken_Hippo 2y ago
    It definitely isn't uniform in the US - it isn't even uniform in schools near each other. Schooling systems between countries are very difficult to compare. I just learned that some UK schools have gifted and talented programs and funds, for example.
    - arethuza 2y ago
      The UK doesn't even have a single education system (e.g. exams for university entrance and the length of first degrees).
- strken 2y ago
  Mine was great. It had a normal amount of homework, a smaller class size (which was a happy but unintentional accident), and accelerated four years into three. We shared electives with the rest of the school and socialised widely. I was bullied pretty badly through my pre-teen childhood and the program provided a way out of that, which in turn taught me how to interact with a group of people who didn't physically and emotionally abuse me for social gain - something a lot of people take for granted. Which is to say that anecdotes are of course going to be mixed.
InDubioProRubio 2y ago
The terror of the masses to join the molasses.

surfingdino 2y ago

Because making someone think is stupid-shaming and therefore not politically correct.

monero-xmr 2y ago
Eventually everyone is tested. I have received perfect looking resumes and cover letters, then you get the person on a call and they are… hopeless. It’s very sad. Who pushed them so far? How did they get the credentials? Who wrote and edited their materials? Eventually the “rubber meets the road” so to speak, and all of the lies and gold stars and platitudes don’t count for anything.
- kaba0 2y ago
  There are certainly people like that, but there are also exceptionally smart people that just absolutely suck at selling themselves, and you might unknowingly decided the same way in case of both. It’s very hard to fairly evaluate someone. E.g. I had interviews where I 100% know more than one of my interviewers on the specific topic (not bragging, my knowledge is ain’t a high bar), and that gap in this unusual direction made the process very awkward and strange.
  - lanstin 2y ago
    I have only gotten jobs because of people I have worked with before. I have written all kinds of software for all kinds of systems and products but I just don't come across as smart on a first meeting. And to be fair I almost invariably like to chew on a knotty problem for a few days turning it over in my head till I get a feel for it, unless I have already solved a very similar problem; but I only want to solve novel problems. Old problems in software should be solvable easily. The current interviewing process would not hire me unless I had already worked with the deciders before.
    - surfingdino 2y ago
      > Old problems in software should be solvable easily I keep telling people who interview me that this is what APIs, modules, and frameworks are for. They capture good solutions to problems and allow us to move faster and build better software. If they are rude to me I tell them that I thought they were an e-commerce business and should not be solving basic problems in Computer Science.

ZeroGravitas 2y ago

In some ways this supports the point, in others it's the exact opposite. He says spoonfeeding information to people in bite-size chunks is like processed food and it should be hard, but you're saying that information should be spoonfed to 'smart' kids in exactly the right level of difficulty or they'll wreck their lives. Possibly it's like the concept of flow, where the standard suggestion is that things should be not too hard and not too easy, in order to keep your attention, interest and focus. But philosphically, that's just 'spoon-feeding' information in bite-size chunks like processed food, it's just varying the size of the bite to suit the level of the reciever, which again is exactly what he's saying is bad.

Broken_Hippo 2y ago

And so many of those programs were absolutely horrible. I had a lot more homework than my peers and was expected to act more mature. Sorry, but we were all the same age as other kids - we didn't deserve a higher workload (as kids and teens) and we should have been expected to act our age. It was pretty common to make fun of others for not keeping up well enough (struggling not allowed) or for appearing too smart (Not me, but a family member). Some school systems completely separated gifted kids from 'regular' students. By high school, it was obvious that this created some issues communicating with a broader range of folks. There is more than one way to make sure gifted kids get challenged - you don't necessarily need a special class for gifted kids. And you'll need to provide proof for the last one. It is true that they do teach so that the test scores are good - and since funding and jobs are tied to that testing, other things are going to go down. This isn't really making content matching the lowest denominator, though.

conjectures 2y ago
Seems geographical/not uniform. In UK some schools just pocket the gifted and talented funds and deliver nothing.
- Broken_Hippo 2y ago
  It definitely isn't uniform in the US - it isn't even uniform in schools near each other. Schooling systems between countries are very difficult to compare. I just learned that some UK schools have gifted and talented programs and funds, for example.
  - arethuza 2y ago
    The UK doesn't even have a single education system (e.g. exams for university entrance and the length of first degrees).
strken 2y ago
Mine was great. It had a normal amount of homework, a smaller class size (which was a happy but unintentional accident), and accelerated four years into three. We shared electives with the rest of the school and socialised widely. I was bullied pretty badly through my pre-teen childhood and the program provided a way out of that, which in turn taught me how to interact with a group of people who didn't physically and emotionally abuse me for social gain - something a lot of people take for granted. Which is to say that anecdotes are of course going to be mixed.

InDubioProRubio 2y ago

The terror of the masses to join the molasses.