Well Put confused!
Although I would add that most of here have experienced that classroom teacher are not skilled (nor are they usually trained) in seeing ability as we parents think if it. Throwing out ability grouping because when a Racist society uses it, the results are Racist, is a Baby/Bathwater situation in my view. There are studies to suggest that everyone learns more when placed in groups that move at the right pace and depth.
As for "tracking" not really helping - it seems logical that it wouldn't, but yes it often does. The exception is when the child gets more busywork, but, perhaps with a gradeskip or two, tracking, like pull out gifted programs can be helpful ingriedients in an individualized gifted program.
Yes, one must be aware of the history of tracking, IQ tests. It matters. Eugenics lurks right underneath the surface of the history and development of IQ test. It is where we in the U.S. were as a nation at that time. I would be doing my child a disservice if I didn't get his IQ tested because I am against the politics of some of the history of the tests.
But Confused (who doesn't sound confused at all to me) -
I mostly agree more with your last paragraph:
Advocating for an appropriate eduction for all might be even more effective. Even a near-perfect small school district can't be expected to know how to meet the needs of the kind of kid they may see only once every 20 years or so. However if school districts were more focused on reaching kids than test scores then when they see this twenty year kid, they might be able to plug into some type of nationalized resource network for help in meeeting her needs.
Many States have a resource person who is a wealth of help and information, so national would be nice, but possibly not key. If only the local districts would use the resource they have already! ((That's how it played out in my experience anyway.)
It's true that someone at the +6 Standard Deviation would be rare, but Level IIIs or "too high to measure" or Highly/Profoundly gifted starts at the +3 Standard Deviation. I believe that's where many of the children we are talking about are. Even the top 3rd standard deviation is preety common in all but the smallest districts. We are talking a whole .75%, in an average district, which adds up quickly if one looks for them district-wide.
But yes, the high ground is certianly the way to go - appropriate education for all children, even ours. And I think that beyond advocating with the school people, just talking to and winning over our neighbors is a politically important step.
Thanks for giving me interesting things to think about!
Trinity
