Not to get into the middle of a political discussion, but does anyone feel that the federal mandate (with funding tied to the mandate) to "close the achievement gap" has hurt the higher performing kids?
The achievement gap gets closed when higher-performing kids stagnate, so yes, you're right. The whole point is to stop the bright kids and teach the underachievers. If you let the bright kids move ahead, most of the underachievers wouldn't be able to catch up and the achievement gap would stay in place in schools just as it does in the real world. Can't have that!
The educators I've spoken to about this don't see themselves as not allowing bright kids to learn. They take the view that these kids are already "proficient," which to them means that no more attention is warranted. When I've asked, "Why not teach the bright kids too?" the reaction from the majority with whom I've spoken has been confusion: "Why would we do
that? They're already proficient."
I've tried to argue that it's important to strive for excellence, but I've never got much of a response.
I think that this approach is part ideology, part a response to the demands of NCLB, and part a failure of imagination. Some of them really don't see that excellence can mean more than getting 100% on a grade-level test of basic material.
