Not at all-- just that public naming/framing is probably inappropriate. For exactly the reasons that aquinas outlines in cases 1 and 2 particularly.
Personally, the non-GT kids? That's between them and their parents unless it impacts my own gifted child's education.
The problem is that it DOES.
School policy (that my DD has to get special permission to circumvent)?
You cannot enroll in most AP courses without having first taken the regular or Honors version of that SAME course.
This is GT for high school kids around here. I think that we can all agree that for truly high IQ learners, that is mostly very inappropriate at meeting their needs for faster pacing and less repetition. It's because some 30% of our district is identified. It's also why I make the claim that there is no real GT here. It's a status thing, pure and simple. And they've watered the difficulty down so much that it lost any meaning that it might once have had for high-ability learners. To no avail, I might add-- because the kids who can't hack the AP course still can't, by and large, after a year-long "prep" class either. The truly GT kids run circles around those struggling classmates, I'm afraid.
Anyway.
Why the need for PUBLIC acknowledgement of individual student's learning needs to begin with?? I'm seriously confused about what positive impact that could have. Again, this isn't about what these children do-- it's about what they ARE.
If we've been so successful at de-stigmatizing learning challenges, (which I agree has taken place and is an advocacy goal) then why wouldn't it be equally appropriate to note those students who are having their educational needs met by "alternative diploma" programs in Special Ed?
I personally don't understand why parents would want either thing in the school yearbook. Class pictures with teacher names-- FINE. Everyone will 'know' which classes are which anyway.
Actively labeling those children rubs me the wrong way; it's outing them to their peers and to other parents. They don't get to CHOOSE to belong to that class or not. Unlike queer clubs or community service clubs, not joining means not having your basic need for FAPE met in a least-restrictive environment. Now, it's not an obligation under the law, to do that for nondisabled students, but it's the SPIRIT of the mission, for sure-- because that is WHY it is a protection afforded disabled students. So that they can be included like their peers.
If not ALL children have to have an IQ range divulged by the school yearbook, then none of them should have to.
