←back to thread

412 points tafda | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
bilbo0s ◴[] No.42247700[source]
My unpopular take is that people, and definitely the government, would take gifted options more seriously if there weren’t so many kids who did nothing more than learn the multiplication table early being classified as gifted. You limit enrollment to only the extreme outliers and at that point there would be national security benefits to identifying these children. (Heck, I'd bet the federal government might even try to step in and take over the education of gifted children for its own benefit.)

As it stands, it’s just a bunch of kids who mostly land on boringly normal tracks to public flagships. There’s not much upside in even identifying them, because "gifted" has been reduced to mean, well, pretty much anyone who can get a good grade.

replies(5): >>42247870 #>>42247913 #>>42247961 #>>42248186 #>>42248372 #
1. jessepasley ◴[] No.42247961[source]
Is that how gifted students are identified these days? When I went through the gifted program as a kid/teen, we had to take what was considered to be an IQ test at the time. Being far ahead in some skills in schools might be have been indicator but not sufficient to being admitted.
replies(1): >>42275701 #
2. hydrolox ◴[] No.42275701[source]
It's still IQ test, at least when I was in the program ~5-10 years ago. To be honest, though, there was still a clique of nerdy kids and "the rest" even within the program (which for me was 2 separate classes of kids, so for each grade in the whole school there were 2 classes worth of gifted kids.)