Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums General Discussion Why Did Studying Intelligence Become Taboo?

[quote=ValIt's clear that smart people have a huge advantage.

US society has become more egalitarian over the last 150 years or so.

But I think we've made a mistake in how we apply that extension of opportunity. By pushing everyone to go to college and downplaying other options, we overlook the fact that some people just aren't suited to getting a BA. This isn't because they're Hispanic or female or poor. It's because they just aren't smart enough. Yet somehow, this fact gets tangled up with ethnicity or sex or economic background and the real reasons for why Johnny really ought to be thinking about another career path get lost in the scuffle.

[/quote]

I believe our society has become egalitarian in rhetoric, not in practice. It has of course become more egalitarian over time, but is still far from achieving that goal. US education shockingly unequal and is in fact designed to be unequal. Therefore, kids from wealthier families will always have more opportunities than kids from poorer families, regardless of there respective IQs. And, in fact, many many children in our country are implicit and sometimes explicitly told early on that college is NOT an option for them, regardless of their ability level.

And therein lies the challenge. Having a high IQ only provides a practical advantage to someone if their intelligence is properly nurtured from a young age. This is not true for many children and even if they have an above average IQ, they will not fulfill their potential if they are not provided with the proper tools for demonstrating their abilities.

Imagine, for example, a gifted child in a poor school who becomes bored early on, becomes a discipline challenge, etc. What becomes of that child if they don't have parents who can recognize the need for/afford educational testing, look for 2E, etc. Or a teacher that can tell the difference between gifted boredom and ADHD? That child becomes labeled a troublemaker, becomes an underachiever, may get in with the wrong crowd, drop out of high school, who knows? Even if she/he doesn't drop out, it is highly likely that they will finish high school and not have the credits or skills needed to get accepted to college. Is that child college material? She/he definitely could have been, but will likely never be.

Until the playing field is fair, we have no way of knowing whether someone is "not college material" because they don't have the cognitive ability to handle it or because they did not receive the appropriate lower level education to be successful there. And there are no visible signs that we are moving toward a fairer playing field anytime soon.

While I am all for presenting alternative options to young people, this systemic inequality is why I don't see how we can say that some people are college material and some are not in a way that is based "solely" on cognitive ability and is not heavily dependent on socio-economic or racial/ethnic position.

If the income gap is widening, then is society more egalitarian? Can the more talented, get so much more than the less talented?

There is a middle through high school here for the performing arts kind. DD's classmate older sister started there this year and the mother told me the math was weak. And I can understand that. It is about becoming a musical/dancing/actor star. And if you don't, too bad, waitress.

Because this is a performing arts school, the difference in success or not is dramatic (pun intended). But think of regular school. The really talented can become neurosurgeons or theorectical physists like Brian Greene. The rest, figure out a job, which may or not have benefits and the ability to buy a house and support a family.

I think that is the unspoken. Everyone wants their kid to have the shot at success. And putting certain kids in a special gifted programs does give them a better shot. Our principal is totally opposed of accelerated math (even though there are gifted classes and a similar school a few blocks away pushes the gifted agenda) I still like the school for a few reasons and just use CTY. But her attitude is really annoying for me, yet the parents of kids in non-gifted classes love her for it.

They out number us.

Ren

Lots and lots of schools have decreased or even eliminated their gifted programs.
Our local public school is ranked in the top 10% of California schools (OK, maybe that isn't much!!). I asked our principal if I could for next year start a math club for any kids who were interested. We could do math competitions 4th-6th grade. My son will be a 4th grader. He is really good at math and really wants to do that. I said that our family could donate the money for it, etc.
The principal was very nice but said he really needs a remedial math club and could I do that instead???
With No Child Left Behind, the schools need to bring EVERY kid up to some standard. Or they lose funding/money, etc. There is thus no incentive to encourage or support kids who have already met that minimum standard, like a gifted child.

A "remedial math club" is called "after-school tutoring" and the school is mandated under NCLB to provide it to students who are falling behind. No way that this should be considered your responsibility and no way that it should substitute for a competitive math club for student who are actually interested in math. Of course, all students who are actually interested in and excited about learning problem-solving strategies and techniques should be encouraged to attend the competition-focused math club, even if they don't seem likely to win any prizes.

How about a private math club??