Originally Posted by playandlearn
Originally Posted by HowlerKarma
Running a 4 minute mile, for example. Completing and fully understanding a 1000 page work in a couple of days. Writing a grant overnight. Completely mastering undergraduate integral calculus in two weeks.

These are great achievements that should be recognized by any achievement-based program, right? If everyone works equally hard, then people with extraordinary abilities would easily achieve a lot more than someone with average ability. So looking at achievement, not potential, should make sense. In a regular classroom, ceilings would be a real issue. But if one looks beyond the classroom, and especially when one gets older, there should be lots of opportunities for achieving way beyond the boundary that a classroom teacher sets up. I think it makes sense to look at IQ when the kids are young, but as they get older the focus should shift to achievement.

I think we need a definition of "achievement" before we can actually talk in a meaningful way about this.