←back to thread

California's most neglected group of students: the gifted ones

(www.latimes.com)
412 points tafda | 1 comments | 26 Nov 24 16:53 UTC | HN request time: 0.254s | source
Show context
csa ◴[26 Nov 24 17:25 UTC] No.42247695[source]▶
It’s not just California, but California may be one of the more egregious state neglecters.

The push at the state level for policies that focus on equality of outcomes over equality of opportunities will not end well for the gifted and talented communities.

Whenever I hear these people talk about their policies, I can’t help but recall Harrison Bergeron.

Focusing on equality of outcomes in a society that structurally does not afford equality of opportunities is a fool’s game that ends with Bergeron-esque levels of absurdity.

Imho, the only viable/main solution is to acknowledge that we all aren’t equal, we don’t all have access to the same opportunities, but as a country we can implement policies that lessen the imbalance.

Head Start is a good example.

Well-run gifted and talented programs in schools are also good examples.

Killing truly progressive programs for the purpose of virtue signaling is a loss for society.

replies(20): >>42247806 #>>42247816 #>>42247846 #>>42247879 #>>42247950 #>>42247987 #>>42248015 #>>42248175 #>>42248677 #>>42248849 #>>42249074 #>>42249151 #>>42249205 #>>42249364 #>>42250032 #>>42250676 #>>42250718 #>>42250987 #>>42252785 #>>42258523 #
philipov ◴[26 Nov 24 17:35 UTC] No.42247806[source]▶
While I may have sympathy for your more substantive points, anytime I hear someone mention virtue signalling, it makes it sound like they're virtue signalling. Better to just not bring up that dog whistle.
replies(2): >>42247920 #>>42247941 #
exe34 ◴[26 Nov 24 17:45 UTC] No.42247920[source]▶
it's a perfectly good phrase to describe what it says. if that bothers you, maybe you need to ask yourself why.
replies(2): >>42247978 #>>42248789 #
lern_too_spel ◴[26 Nov 24 17:50 UTC] No.42247978[source]▶
In my experience, people who use the term "virtue signalling" don't understand the problems that the supposed virtue signalers are trying to solve and simply use the term as a cheap dismissal of their policies. If the policies are bad, explain why they're bad. Don't just say that people putting the 10 Commandments in schools are virtue signalling.
replies(1): >>42249346 #
exe34 ◴[26 Nov 24 19:55 UTC] No.42249346[source]▶
Or indeed, it's possible that neither you nor the virtue signallers understand why they're doing it.
replies(2): >>42250575 #>>42253501 #
1. lern_too_spel ◴[27 Nov 24 06:28 UTC] No.42253501[source]▶
I understand that they're trying to fix a perceived problem. In the case of the people pushing the 10 Commandments in schools, they earnestly believe they're going to solve teen pregnancy, drug usage, etc. Saying that they're virtue signalling ignores the problem and strawmans the reason for their proposal. Saying why their policy won't work and another will addresses the problem.