Okay, hopping over from the other thread... I think my comment is a bit tangential to your idea Questions, because I think your focus is on academic achievement, not necessary ability. I had alluded to perceived elitism as a barrier for special programs for gifted kids. I don't agree that it's not socially acceptable to be "smart". I think it's just the opposite. Perhaps there's a semantic difference here: I'm not talking nerdy, prodigious in an area, even high academic achievement - I'm talking overall raw intelligence. Smart as in: I'd like you to meet my friend Steve. He's really cute, considerate, and extremely *smart*. As in: My baby will watch this video and grow up to be a genius (smart). How do you get around the idea that some people see special programs for smart kids the same way as they might see special programs for good-looking kids? Of course I may be way off in my perception...
