Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums General Discussion NYT opinion: No (rich) child left behind

No, and increasingly inseparable, in fact. But that is more recent data-- it could be what is explaining the trend in the article, though. I wonder what that curve looked like in 1920 or 1935.

It's possible that what the trend actually shows is a RETURN to a time when educational attainment was equal to SES, and that the period from 1948 through 1980 was an anomoly due to federal programs which made SES a less crucial factor in college attendance.

Interesting idea.

(3) You can oppose Social Darwinism based on the well-documented flaws in the "science."

As an adoptive parent I can say for certain that there are MANY reasons besides Bostonian's Bell Curve arguments that adopted children may struggle in school. Pre-natal care, malnutrition, attachment issues, the possibility that mothers who place children for adoption regardless of race may be more likely to have ADHD etc. I have two friends with adopted children, one from Ethiopia, one African-American, who are at least HG. If they were being raised in the environment they were born into you are deluded if you think they would "look" gifted. Deprivation has an effect on children that has nothing to do with genetics.

True.

I've been seriously questioning the price tag of private colleges costing $60,000 a year. I mean, seriously? Sixty thousand dollars for eight months of classes? This is not a realistic and reasonable price tag.

For decades, they've been telling us that "tuition doesn't even begin to cover the cost of an education at College X!!" Yet there is a long and unhappy history of annual tuition increases that surpass the increase in the cost of living. I suspect (but do not know) that increased tuition is helping to pay for fancy new buildings that may or may not be used by undergrads.

And I am speaking of a graduate of one of those pricey elite New England colleges! So, no sour grapes here.

THIS.

Maslow + bell curve = what we see is obscured by many factors other than genetically determined potential.

Only kids with high-enough SES get to meet their potential. The rest struggle to meet SOME of it.

The findings say that adoption improves IQ and school performance. The argument is based on environment, not heritability.

Yes, exactly. This is true of anthropometric characteristics (height, weight, etc). I suspect that it's also true of cognitive ability. And I also suspect that incremental generational gains in cognitive ability may occur if successive generations of a given family or population live in advantaged circumstances. This is certainly true of things like height.

Right. But that doesn't seem to be the argument of the Bell Curve which is often cited here by Bostonian. And re: racial differences on IQ tests, I will say that I am 100% certain there are questions my dd12 answered correctly on the WISC that a kid from Camden would simply never have been exposed to.

That's not (at least not totally) true. I knew a man who came to US to give his kids good future. He is just a handyman (he finished his HS only) and could not afford to live in good school district. But he always push his kids to study hard. Now both of his kids recieved scholarships are in medical school.

With regard to SES:

Dr. Ben Carson (Neurosurgeon from JH) came from poor SES. (His mother did not even read well but she wanted her kids to read 2 books a week and always on their back to study.)

Academic success depends on both

1) the kids' inherent ability (IQ)
2) motivation and support (school, parents, environment)

If we have both, SES does not matter. Of course, high SES means you can move to the good school district and provide top notch education and tutoring if needed.

The problem is the attitude of the parents. Unfortunately many parents are passionate into their kids sports activity than the education. One of the high school voted to build $ 10 million stadium but did not do anything about losing 10 teachers (half of them in special education) due to Federal and State budget cut.



But I do agree that educated parents encourage better education and advocate for their kids than their counterparts and therfore the children of educated parents are MOST LIKELY to find success academically than their counterparts.