12 ms·

I don’t necessarily see a problem with enabling like talented groups to be mingled together, that said it depends on the metrics. A friend who had a 3.2 in HS

I don’t necessarily see a problem with enabling like talented groups to be mingled together, that said it depends on the metrics. A friend who had a 3.2 in HS did way better in life than several 4.0+ students. The other end of the spectrum is the way most of the US handles high school. Long gone are gifted and talented programs before high school and in many cases, for instance those with an ability for math are stuck in classes with those that will top out before algebra. I understand your point, but the catering to the mediocre that happens these days in US grade schools isn’t the right answer either.

alephnerd 1y ago
The issue with "gifted only schools" is they end up eating the bulk of funds and legitimately don't have a strong predictive capacity on student success that couldn't already be explained the parental background and early childhood care. In my case, I never placed in gifted academic programs in elementary and middle, but by HS was able to take 14 AP classes (and auto shop - always liked tinkering since elementary school; which was a major reason why I never placed well in gifted programs) and end up at HYS. Most of my peers there similarly didn't attended gifted programs or high schools - amongst the non-legacies the biggest predictor of success was SAT scores and GPA. While giving and funding academic and gifted tracks within schools should be allowed, "gifted" students should not be segregated from "normal" students. There's no reason a high school can't both offer as many AP classes as possible ALONG with vocational classes. Edit: can't reply > Why should gifted schools need more money than normal schools It's not that they need more funding. The issue is gifted programs tend to overlap with upper income families [0] - the same kinds of families that are overrepresented in School Boards and PTAs [1] I'm not saying go all "San Francisco 2.0", but recognize that gifted only schools does lead to a moral perception that other students are not as deserving for funding or are "bad students". [0] - https://news.vanderbilt.edu/2019/09/30/socioeconomic-status-dictates-which-children-get-into-gifted-programs/ https://news.vanderbilt.edu/2019/09/30/socioeconomic-status-... [1] - https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/2332858418818074 https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/23328584188180... > the highest-ability schools receive a decrement in funding But are overrepresented in urban areas where human capital is significantly higher than rural areas within Romania [2]. Students in rural and small town schools are less liked to be as healthy or a affluent as students in cities or major urban centers, and this does have a tangible downstream effect on education as a whole. [2] - https://www.shs-conferences.org/articles/shsconf/abs/2021/06/shsconf_rebcos2020_01003/shsconf_rebcos2020_01003.html https://www.shs-conferences.org/articles/shsconf/abs/2021/06... > If you look at SF... Note how I said << I'm not saying go all "San Francisco 2.0" >> There is a happy middle ground between being an exclusionary system like Romania's or a delusional bussed system like San Francisco. Giving the example of a city with a population the size of Cincinnati is clearly a facile argument, as it is obviously not representative of the rest of California, let alone the US.
- IncreasePosts 1y ago
  Why should gifted schools need more money than normal schools? I would imagine "problematic children schools" would need the most funds because you would need the lowest teacher:student ratio to maintain order
- akoboldfrying 1y ago
  >The issue with "gifted only schools" is they end up eating the bulk of funds The article points out that the opposite is the case in Romania: the highest-ability schools receive a decrement in funding.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
- cyberax 1y ago
  > The issue with "gifted only schools" is they end up eating the bulk of funds No, they don't. If you look at SF, the high-performing Lowell High gets a bit _less_ funding than the average for the district. Stuyvesant in NYC is right at the average spending. I studied in a magnet school with other gifted kids, including a future Olympiad winner. Our school barely had heating in winter. It's really the _other_ kids that make all the difference.
- jmspring 1y ago
  That is a lot to read. I’m no longer in my 40s. Grade school - in San Jose - gifted and talented classes were classes at the school not a separate school. Sadly education has evolved where schools teach to the norm rather than acknowledging people have different strengths and weaknesses. It does not require separate schools, it needs funding and more importantly, someone good at math needs to be able to work with others good at math. The educational curriculum in the US for grade school has been standardized to the mediocre and any attempt to encourage gifted is considered a problem.
  - alephnerd 1y ago
    I agree with you! Give students the ability to test out of classes and/or dual enroll in community colleges, BUT make sure they are all still in the same school meeting and greeting and bumping into each other. Dumbing down curricula is a bad move, and preventing students from being able to test out or take classes earlier is also a bad move. But segregating students into different schools based on academic ability is equally as bad. > Grade school - in San Jose - gifted and talented classes were classes at the school not a separate school Yep. This is a model I agree with, and am a product of as well being a fellow Bay Area native

alephnerd 1y ago

The issue with "gifted only schools" is they end up eating the bulk of funds and legitimately don't have a strong predictive capacity on student success that couldn't already be explained the parental background and early childhood care. In my case, I never placed in gifted academic programs in elementary and middle, but by HS was able to take 14 AP classes (and auto shop - always liked tinkering since elementary school; which was a major reason why I never placed well in gifted programs) and end up at HYS. Most of my peers there similarly didn't attended gifted programs or high schools - amongst the non-legacies the biggest predictor of success was SAT scores and GPA. While giving and funding academic and gifted tracks within schools should be allowed, "gifted" students should not be segregated from "normal" students. There's no reason a high school can't both offer as many AP classes as possible ALONG with vocational classes. Edit: can't reply > Why should gifted schools need more money than normal schools It's not that they need more funding. The issue is gifted programs tend to overlap with upper income families [0] - the same kinds of families that are overrepresented in School Boards and PTAs [1] I'm not saying go all "San Francisco 2.0", but recognize that gifted only schools does lead to a moral perception that other students are not as deserving for funding or are "bad students". [0] - https://news.vanderbilt.edu/2019/09/30/socioeconomic-status-dictates-which-children-get-into-gifted-programs/ https://news.vanderbilt.edu/2019/09/30/socioeconomic-status-... [1] - https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/2332858418818074 https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/23328584188180... > the highest-ability schools receive a decrement in funding But are overrepresented in urban areas where human capital is significantly higher than rural areas within Romania [2]. Students in rural and small town schools are less liked to be as healthy or a affluent as students in cities or major urban centers, and this does have a tangible downstream effect on education as a whole. [2] - https://www.shs-conferences.org/articles/shsconf/abs/2021/06/shsconf_rebcos2020_01003/shsconf_rebcos2020_01003.html https://www.shs-conferences.org/articles/shsconf/abs/2021/06... > If you look at SF... Note how I said << I'm not saying go all "San Francisco 2.0" >> There is a happy middle ground between being an exclusionary system like Romania's or a delusional bussed system like San Francisco. Giving the example of a city with a population the size of Cincinnati is clearly a facile argument, as it is obviously not representative of the rest of California, let alone the US.

IncreasePosts 1y ago
Why should gifted schools need more money than normal schools? I would imagine "problematic children schools" would need the most funds because you would need the lowest teacher:student ratio to maintain order
akoboldfrying 1y ago
>The issue with "gifted only schools" is they end up eating the bulk of funds The article points out that the opposite is the case in Romania: the highest-ability schools receive a decrement in funding.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
cyberax 1y ago
> The issue with "gifted only schools" is they end up eating the bulk of funds No, they don't. If you look at SF, the high-performing Lowell High gets a bit _less_ funding than the average for the district. Stuyvesant in NYC is right at the average spending. I studied in a magnet school with other gifted kids, including a future Olympiad winner. Our school barely had heating in winter. It's really the _other_ kids that make all the difference.
jmspring 1y ago
That is a lot to read. I’m no longer in my 40s. Grade school - in San Jose - gifted and talented classes were classes at the school not a separate school. Sadly education has evolved where schools teach to the norm rather than acknowledging people have different strengths and weaknesses. It does not require separate schools, it needs funding and more importantly, someone good at math needs to be able to work with others good at math. The educational curriculum in the US for grade school has been standardized to the mediocre and any attempt to encourage gifted is considered a problem.
- alephnerd 1y ago
  I agree with you! Give students the ability to test out of classes and/or dual enroll in community colleges, BUT make sure they are all still in the same school meeting and greeting and bumping into each other. Dumbing down curricula is a bad move, and preventing students from being able to test out or take classes earlier is also a bad move. But segregating students into different schools based on academic ability is equally as bad. > Grade school - in San Jose - gifted and talented classes were classes at the school not a separate school Yep. This is a model I agree with, and am a product of as well being a fellow Bay Area native