|
0 members (),
205
guests, and
28
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 2,513 Likes: 1
Member
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 2,513 Likes: 1 |
Reintegrated into the general education stream under a policy of "inclusion" of all special education students.
What is to give light must endure burning.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,299 Likes: 2
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,299 Likes: 2 |
It seems incredibly cruel to the child to be pushed so aggressively. Why any parent would want to make their child look more gifted than they naturally are is a total mystery to me. The underlying message is, "You are unlovable just the way you are." If you are in NYC, and the choices are (1) get your 120-IQ child into the 130-IQ threshold public school gifted program with some preparation (2) pay $40K annually for private school (3) put your 120-IQ child in a public school where the average IQ is maybe 90 You forgot one more option: (4) Leave. Sorry Bostonian, I see your point about bad schools in big cities, but two wrongs don't make a right and all that. No one is forcing anyone who can afford expensive test prep to live in a city where the competition for the gifted program is insane and many of the regular schools have serious problems. It's the selfish attitude that bugs me the most. "I'll coach my kid into an extra ten points because I don't want to leave Manhattan. Who cares about kids who actually are gifted and don't get into these programs because of my little snowflake and others like him? Too bad for them." If people were just buying a little $10 book, it wouldn't matter. But if that was all they were doing, the test prep industry there wouldn't even exist. And it's huge.
Last edited by Val; 07/11/14 01:34 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 144
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 144 |
It seems incredibly cruel to the child to be pushed so aggressively. Why any parent would want to make their child look more gifted than they naturally are is a total mystery to me. The underlying message is, "You are unlovable just the way you are." If you are in NYC, and the choices are (1) get your 120-IQ child into the 130-IQ threshold public school gifted program with some preparation (2) pay $40K annually for private school (3) put your 120-IQ child in a public school where the average IQ is maybe 90 the appeal of option (1) is apparent. And even (2) may require preparation -- the elite private schools are both selective and expensive. I stand by my original comment. To your NYC-specific example, you're presenting only a subset of options. Nowhere on your list are advocacy, moving to a district where the mean is closer to your child's ability, afterschooling, a less expensive private school, partial homeschooling, homeschooling, virtual schooling, alternative schools, starting a school, tutors, or teaching cooperatives. A 120 student will probably find the class with truly 130+ students too challenging, and it is unfair to all involved to force children into molds where they don't belong or to dilute standards for those with legitimate gifted needs. Also, I'm troubled by the doublespeak such parents would be teaching their children--"cheating is wrong, with the exception of the multitude of parentally-approved situations where cheating has a materially positive effect on your lifestyle." It's not only unethical, it coveys a misplaced disapproval of the child at a fundamental level. The real solution, of course, is to demand that schools offer meaningful ability grouping to all students, and for parents to lovingly accept their children as they are. I appreciate that this isn't as expedient as jumping the queue and is a long-term strategy. That all sounds a bit naive in the context of New York City. Good luck advocating for admission policy changes in a system this large that is highly politicized, racially split etc. (Sad fact: I was just reading that they have something on the order of 77k homeless kids in their system nowadays) Similarly its a non trivial process to move to a district that may or may not be better, lots of families have 2 working parents which rules out things like home schooling. Starting school is probably also beyond the capabilities of most people. If you step back and think about it, we're talking about thousands of kids in this category. Having everyone go and try to work around the system is not going to scale. Personally, this points out the need for a more systemic solution. (And I'm thankful for all the flaws in SPS that it functions better than NY)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 1,228
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 1,228 |
Reintegrated into the general education stream under a policy of "inclusion" of all special education students. Oh, I see. You mean abolished.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 1,228
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 1,228 |
And an IQ of 298? On a Wechsler exam? How could anyone have taken that number seriously? How would you even test for it using the standard exams, which falter at scores way, way below 200? According to this table of IQ percentiles, an IQ of 202 is expected in one person in nearly 200 billion. I suspect that this number isn't accurate (otherwise, Marilyn vos Savant and Chris Langan being alive at the same time in this general area of our galaxy would be statistical impossibilities), but it gives an idea of how rare a score of 298 would be (unless there really are crazy smart Vulcans living in the 40 Eridani A star system, that is). FWIW, assuming mean=100, sd=15, the frequency of an IQ of 298 should be about one in twenty octodecillion= 20,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000=2*10^{58}, which is more than the number of atoms in the solar system. ETA: Correction FWIW, assuming mean=100, sd=15, the frequency of an IQ of [at least] 298 should be about one in forty octodecillion= 40,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000= 4*10^{58}, which is more than the number of atoms in the solar system. I should have calculated probability of being at least 16.2SD away on one side not both (so the previous calculation was probability of IQ>=298 or IQ<=-98).
Last edited by 22B; 07/18/14 09:26 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2014
Posts: 469
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2014
Posts: 469 |
on a slightly different note, Justin Chapman *appears* to have a facebook page now... and (if it really is him) is writing a book... https://www.facebook.com/JustinChapmanBoyGenius
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,299 Likes: 2
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,299 Likes: 2 |
FWIW, assuming mean=100, sd=15, the frequency of an IQ of 298 should be about one in twenty octodecillion= 20,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000=2*10^{58}, which is more than the number of atoms in the solar system. So, smarter than pretty much everyone else in the known universe (Vulcans excepted). 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,898
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,898 |
DS will do a "reasoning test" - verbal, nonverbal and numerical reasoning, is about all I know - next term, as part of a pretest for a school he may go to. I had assumed we wouldn't do any prep... until we visited and heard the guy in charge of admissions talk. He casually assumed all the children would of course be very familiar with such tests, and contrasted that with the interview part of the process for which, he said, we shouldn't prepare our children beyond making sure they were happy to have a conversation with an unfamiliar adult.
So, DS is doing a bit of practice of NVR, that being his relative weakness. Seems a bit daft, since he's already about as good at it as I am and I'm... surely better at reasoning than most 11yos... but there you go. It's expected, and we want him to have the best chance, so we'll prep. (A little :-)
Don't be too quick to equate prep with cheating.
Email: my username, followed by 2, at google's mail
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,181
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,181 |
No, but at some point one does enter the shadows there, where the shades of grey start on the continuum toward "damn-the-torpedos-full-on-wrong-CHEATING-with-a-capital-C-and-liar-liar-pants-on-fire-claims" variety "helping" of one's children. A ten dollar (Pound/Euro) book isn't it, but then... is a year's worth of an hour daily? Two hours daily? A dedicated two-week "bootcamp" that costs several thousand and comes with a money-back-gaurantee of "improved" scores? Coaching using old exams themselves? Non-standard proctoring? It is a continuum. I used to think that it was sufficient to say to myself that if a parent's CONSCIENCE were bothering him/her-- that is, if you found yourself asking the question of whether or not what you were doing was squicky-- then it was probably over the line. But I've since decided that that was hopelessly naive of me. There seem to be a lot of parents who honestly are pretty SHAMELESS about this, seeing no problem at all with things that I think are clearly unethical in the extreme. In fact, they rationalize that they "have no other choice" or that "everyone else does it" (they don't-- at least I don't think so)-- and that they are doing it for the child's own good (even when it certainly seems clear from an outside perspective that it is causing direct harm). Are there really so many pathological people in the world? I have no idea, but I do know that a great many parents I know have zero problem doing things like WRITING their kids' college and scholarship essays, etc. I cannot even begin to imagine the mindset it takes to do that-- never mind THIS kind of chicanery.It's as though they are living in a reality where ALL of JonLaw's posts are made completely seriously, not even remotely tongue-in-cheek.  They truly seem to be playing some sort of Survivor game with their kids as pawns. If that doesn't make one's skin crawl, I don't know what might.
Schrödinger's cat walks into a bar. And doesn't.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 5,260 Likes: 8
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 5,260 Likes: 8 |
The real solution, of course, is to demand that schools offer meaningful ability grouping to all students, and for parents to lovingly accept their children as they are. Well said.
|
|
|
|
|
