Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums General Discussion Why Did Studying Intelligence Become Taboo?

[quote=ValIt's clear that smart people have a huge advantage.

US society has become more egalitarian over the last 150 years or so.

But I think we've made a mistake in how we apply that extension of opportunity. By pushing everyone to go to college and downplaying other options, we overlook the fact that some people just aren't suited to getting a BA. This isn't because they're Hispanic or female or poor. It's because they just aren't smart enough. Yet somehow, this fact gets tangled up with ethnicity or sex or economic background and the real reasons for why Johnny really ought to be thinking about another career path get lost in the scuffle.

[/quote]

I believe our society has become egalitarian in rhetoric, not in practice. It has of course become more egalitarian over time, but is still far from achieving that goal. US education shockingly unequal and is in fact designed to be unequal. Therefore, kids from wealthier families will always have more opportunities than kids from poorer families, regardless of there respective IQs. And, in fact, many many children in our country are implicit and sometimes explicitly told early on that college is NOT an option for them, regardless of their ability level.

And therein lies the challenge. Having a high IQ only provides a practical advantage to someone if their intelligence is properly nurtured from a young age. This is not true for many children and even if they have an above average IQ, they will not fulfill their potential if they are not provided with the proper tools for demonstrating their abilities.

Imagine, for example, a gifted child in a poor school who becomes bored early on, becomes a discipline challenge, etc. What becomes of that child if they don't have parents who can recognize the need for/afford educational testing, look for 2E, etc. Or a teacher that can tell the difference between gifted boredom and ADHD? That child becomes labeled a troublemaker, becomes an underachiever, may get in with the wrong crowd, drop out of high school, who knows? Even if she/he doesn't drop out, it is highly likely that they will finish high school and not have the credits or skills needed to get accepted to college. Is that child college material? She/he definitely could have been, but will likely never be.

Until the playing field is fair, we have no way of knowing whether someone is "not college material" because they don't have the cognitive ability to handle it or because they did not receive the appropriate lower level education to be successful there. And there are no visible signs that we are moving toward a fairer playing field anytime soon.

While I am all for presenting alternative options to young people, this systemic inequality is why I don't see how we can say that some people are college material and some are not in a way that is based "solely" on cognitive ability and is not heavily dependent on socio-economic or racial/ethnic position.