There is no spoon.

I wonder if this thread could pass the Turing Test.

There is no thread.

I understand, but I also think a point of profound agreement in this thread has been that the curriculum should NOT be diluted in order to allow the non-gifted entrance into the courses. From what I've read here, there is simply disagreement on whether the non-gifted should be admitted AT ALL, regardless of whether they can keep up with the class.

I guess I am just more of a nihilist than I ever thought, because I agree more with JonLaw's point of view that the system should be broken down and challenged rather than manipulated by any parent, whether their child is gifted or not. Can one be an idealist and nihilist at the same time?

Perhaps, and perhaps this is where my idealism shows. For me anyway, the end goal of education is to produce an enlightened individual, not to gain entrance to a particular college. Yeah, I know...

I think you really have to create some sort of alternate system in order to make anything that is actually new. That's really the only way to challenge a system.

The goal is to develop a system that actually works better for as many of the people involved as is practical.

If you just tear out part of the old system, I would expect that you're just going to go back to where you were when that change was added in the first place.

So, if the older system was better than what you currently have, catabolism of certain aspects is a good idea.

Cultures aren't blank slates.

Me too. And this belief is precisely why I've argued what I have here. Unfortunately, a very large number of parental units (and many kids) don't see it that way. For them, college is about certification and status. These attitudes, plus the push for everyone to go to college, are important factors in the packing of AP and honors classes with kids who aren't prepared for the material, and for the rush to get kids into algebra and geometry classes at earlier ages.

There are two bad outcomes:

1. These classes are getting packed with kids who are there for reasons very different from wanting to learn. This creates problems for the ones who are there to learn. I think of the first group as as the "Is this going to be on the test?" crowd.

2. Kids who really aren't ready for these classes are being forced into them by tiger parents, tiger schools, or other reasons. The result is that they end up spending hours every night on homework so that, as a few have noted on this thread, they can look HG+ on paper. It's destructive and a form of child abuse IMO.

I see your points about different motivations among different people and that IQ isn't everything. I agree that there's a lot more to talent than IQ. But at the same time, it's still a big deal.

Yes yes yes.
Part of the problem is that the classes were created to raise the ceiling for kids who were unusually able, unusually hardworking, and/or unusually interested in the topic (with a minimum competence, of course). For kids in any of these three categories, honors/AP/whatever advanced classes can be a great experience of growth. It's not just a matter of IQ. They are there by choice.

When the class appears on transcripts and becomes important, though, the kids don't feel like they have a choice. Sometimes parents tell them to take it, sometimes they feel the anonymous pressure from some college admissions official, but for them the class stops being about curiosity and exploration and pushing limits and becomes a way to make the grade. Any class that involves group discussion, and any class where the teacher adapts content and lectures to the level of the class, is going to be immediately affected by the presence of a lot of kids who don't really want to be there. When the parents feel pressure from admissions people to make sure their kids get high grades in these classes, they end up putting pressure on the district to lower the expectations in the class so everyone who can make use of the result - the transcript notation - can get it. The end result is that even the syllabus gets diluted down as far as possible, and discussions... go away.

In our district this is followed by another round of even higher level classes to accommodate the kids the original Honors classes were designed for. Unfortunately, this transcript gets noticed too, and before you know it parents are asking for their kids to get A's in THAT class too. It seems to be never-ending.

The only solution I can think of is to remove any transcript notation of which class the student actually took. If there is no shiny prize, than anyone motivated only by shiny prizes will probably leave.

It's never-ending because it's basically driven by a need to DO SOMETHING!

When the something that you do when you DO SOMETHING! is really just turning back the clock, which it is in your example, then the expected outcome is that you will end up right where you started in the first place after some time has passed.

That being said, removing transcript notations would have predictable outcomes too, given the underlying school culture.

It's not enough to say "I think they will leave". You have to look at what the cohort in question is likely to actually do in such a situation.

For example, the cohort might be expected to "replace the school board because they are hurting their children's chances of WINNING!" given who they are. I'm not saying that's the likely outcome. I'm just throwing it out there as an example of what i'm trying to say.

Sigh. You're right.