My point is that there is nothing wrong with celebrating (or simply acknowledging) that some people are born a certain way
Sure. But let's not forget the fact that a school's primary mission is to educate and develop the minds of our citizenry. I would argue that disclosures that undermine the ability of schools to carry out that mission are problematic, as I would argue is true in this instance. I would argue that, for all students, intrinsic motivation to study and expend effort in meaningful academic pursuits is damanged by the disclosure. Here's why:
CASE 1: GT students accurately labeled as GT
(Val, I would particularly draw attention to the cons for case 1.)
Pros:
-External validation
-Enhanced sense of community membership
- (potentially) enhanced social status based on an alignment of personal attributes and the community's expressed values
Cons:
-Internalizing the message that ability trumps effort (increasing the likelihood of future perfectionism, imposter syndrome, underachievement, reduced classroom participation, etc)
-Feeling that your value is out of your control
-Heightened competition for GT-specific academic services, which are necessary for your psychological well-being
-Dilution of GT standards from increased flow of "coached" students into GT
-Reduced intrinsic motivation to achieve academically because an extrinsic reward has been provided
CASE 2: Unidentified true GT students
Pros:
-(for some) Anonymity
-Fitting in
Cons:
-Undermining student self-efficacy, which creates a vicious loop between self-efficacy and future achievement
-Disenfranchisement with the educational system
-(potentially) Typical GT withdrawal/backlash symptoms
CASE 3: Non-GTs falsely ID'd as GT
Pros:
-(Debatable) Access to curricular enrichment beyond one's innate needs
-External validation may spur self-efficacy in borderline-GT cases
Cons:
-Creates an unreasonable and unsubstantiated self-image which risks creating an overly external locus of control in future endeavours
-For self-aware students, undermines self-esteem and self-efficacy
-Disenfranchisement and feeling that you can "con" the system
-Creates unreasonable academic expectations for students where actual GT programming exists to meet GT needs
-Higher likelihood of burnout or compensatory switching from extra-curricular/social/family activities to school work to keep pace
-Imposter syndrome/inferiority complex
CASE 4: Non-GT students correctly identified as non-GT
Pros:
-Students not grouped beyond their ability
-Students see that the school SAYS it values innate ability (message will be undermined if dissonance between talk and actual programming)
Cons:
-Students are subtly taught that the GT students' achievements don't matter and infer this is true in their case
-Students' self-efficacy is lowered, which reduces motivation and achievement
-Reduced inter-group understanding because GT students have purportedly been singled out on the basis of something beyond anyone's control
