I'm not talking solely about advanced kids. I talking about education in general.

Absolutely. When considering

education in general, 11-40% of pupils know the material before the class begins.

That doesn't change the goal of the teachers regarding educating their students.

The goal of generating grades which signal "equal outcomes"?

-VS-

The goal of achieving one term's growth for each student and/or grades which honestly reflect the growth (or lack of growth) for each pupil throughout the term?

Teachers should make sure that all students learn the same curriculum - your "equal outcomes".

I believe you are describing "

grade level proficiency."

Grade level proficiency is NOT the same as assigning grades which indicate "equal outcomes."

Regarding achieving

grade level proficiency, some may say that a teacher's role is to provide ample

opportunity for all students to learn the prescribed grade-level curriculum. Teachers cannot

ensure student learning. Learning is the student's role.

In a perfect world, yes. I believe you used the word "should" 11 times in your post. I do agree that these are useful policies/practices to advocate for.

Meanwhile, the thread has been discussing what IS, not what "should be." Various parties have been attempting to share their observations on trends in grade inflation/deflation, over time. I personally believe that BOTH grade inflation and grade deflation are occurring, and I believe both are occurring due to incentivization for teachers/schools/institutions/programs to assign grades which indicate "equal outcomes."

It's stupid to expect a 5th grade math class to teach 7th grade math just because a minority percentage of the students can handle it.

I do not believe that has been suggested. If you believe otherwise, would you please kindly show me where this has been suggested?

To use your form of expression, what's

stupid is to assign grades to your exemplar 5th grade math class which indicate "equal outcomes" among all pupils when some of the children in your exemplar class are at the 7th grade math level.

This, I believe is the essential topic of the thread: how much can we trust grades (and college degrees conferred) to be indicative of what the pupil knows,

- when grades may be inflated (exaggerating student demonstrated performance)

- when grades may be deflated (under-reporting student demonstrated performance)

- when teachers/institutions/programs are incentivized to report grades which indicate "equal outcomes"

Teachers want "equal outcomes" because it means that all of the students have learned the material.

Assigning grades which indicate "equal outcomes" signals that all pupils have learned the material

equally. That each is performing at a level which is indistinguishable from one another.

Your concern about equal outcomes seems predicated on the idea that teachers should not want all of their 5th graders to grasp the 5th grade curriculum solely because there are some kids who are capable of grasping more.

This false. Concerns about teachers being incentivized to assign grades which indicate "equal outcomes" include:

- grades not providing pupils with honest and meaningful feedback on growth throughout the term

- falsifying records to signal that all pupils are performing at the same skill level

- some students may receive

inflated grades (exaggerating demonstrated knowledge)

- some students may receive

deflated grades (downplaying demonstrated knowledge)

- there is a ceiling beyond which growth is not measured

- growth beyond the ceiling is capped, thwarted, discouraged

- there are a growing number of grading practices in use to ensure the reporting of "equal outcomes"

- truth, honesty, integrity fall by the wayside when essentially measuring with a rubber ruler to report "equal outcomes"

- questionable value of

college degrees conferred