Thanks, Bostonian, for posting. That is a very interesting article and some very thoughtful discussion, as well.
About the article: I did see a bit of fancy footwork, dancing around the topic, leading us all around with a spin: not clearly stating up front that not all schools offer gifted programming, and that the quality of gifted programs in meeting student needs varies greatly.
Black students are 66% less likely to be identified as gifted compared to white students with similar test scores. Black, Latinx, and Native American students are far less likely to attend a school that even offers a gifted program.
It is not about being "identified" or "in a program," it is about meeting student needs by teaching the student(s) in their zone of proximal development.
I'm a fan of grouping students by readiness and ability, not primarily by chronological age.
I'm not a fan of requiring students who grasp the material to be responsible for teaching that material to other students (rather than remaining in the student role and learning something new themselves).
That said, I am impressed with what I read online in the preview of the author's book on teaching critical thinking skills,
Thinking Like a Lawyer (2020, Prufrock Press)
