Fundamentally, I think all this is saying from a tactical standpoint, is that the structure of US schools is ill-equipped to deal with the educational needs on ANY student. The argument so far has been that the content was aimed at the highest number of students, and then differentiation could be made for the outliers.
Though, most of us know, the differentiation was really only benefiting those in between the 90th and 98th percentile of students, rather that those who need it most.
The article, to me, pretty clearly makes a case that the arguments FOR educating the most, and accommodating the least in terms of population isn't sufficient, and is really ideal for a small amount, while the rest accommodate school.
Time for a new model.
