Gifted and Talented

An article was published in the NY Times. This is a link to the discussion about it.

The thrust of the article, and many of the comments, is that in today's "No child left behind" world of public education, no child left behind, really means all children are left behind.

What do I mean by this? Let me use an example -

Child A is a normal student: he is active and playful. Sometimes gets into trouble, but is easily redirected and will pay attention in class and is able to learn given the appropriate amount of time and effort.

Child B is in Child A's class, but is someone the politically correct crowd would like to call "special." He needs a lot of extra help to keep on task and to keep up with the assigned classwork.

Child C is "gifted." He learns quickly, is inquisitive and generally functions at a level above the other children in the class.

Let's look at one scenario: We'll call this "No Child Left Behind." Because of national educational statutes (read: LAW), teachers must prepare all students for the same standardized exams at the same rate. There also appears to be a huge component of "social" promotion, meaning, students cannot be held back because they may be thought poorly of by their peers if they have to repeat the year. As a result, all students are held to the level of the slowest learner in the class.

Let's look at our children, shall we?

Child A is happy - he is able to complete homework without too much effort, leaving more time for play at home.

Child B still struggles, as he will most likely do for the majority of his life. But because the law states we have to be ready for the test on this-or-that date, we don't have time to help Child B to prepare in the way best suited for him. We must trudge on.

Child C is bored stiff. He usually has all homework assignments done before the end of class and will often act out - getting sent to the principal's office and possibly detention. After some time, he will more than likely be diagnosed with AD(H)D and be medicated into submission - for the greater good.

This is the current educational model. Right now, only the slowest student in the class gets to live up to his full potential. The average and gifted students are forced to wait and learn at the slowest rate possible. As a result, there are behavioral problems with these student. They quickly get bored with school and resign to the slow rate of learning. They become demotivated.

Another option, and one I feel is far superior, is the following.

Students are taught based on their individual capabilities. While this is more difficult, as each child will be different, this is actually more true to "no child left behind" than our current system.

As a result, all classes will have to be split into at least 3 different groups - A, B, and C - each corresponding to the children above. Naturally, A will be larger than B or C. Group B, by its very nature, will very likely take up the most resources, so more teachers and teachers aides will be required for this group.

As a result of this grouping, each level can achieve as much as they can in the times given. Placing students with their intellectual peers will keep them stimulated, and will foster natural learning and competition, which will push the groups further.

We must also change the way our students are educated. Memorization of facts is nearly useless and cheapens the information contained therein. Education must have texture, context, and purpose. Learning how to multiply for the sake of knowing how to multiply is pointless. Learning to multiply, if placed in a useful context can motivate students and teach other skills as well.

The trick is finding out what is important to individual students, rather than forcing them to learn specific sets of facts. Not everyone needs to learn calculus, or ancient literature, or sociology. If the child's interests lead them in that direction, then so be it.

All children should learn a few basic skills - interpersonal skills (social niceties, societal norms, manners), basic mathematics (learning to balance a checkbook and handle money), basic sciences (sex ed, intuitive physics, biology and chemistry), reading/writing, and computer skills. With this basic skill set, students who are motivated and interested can learn anything else they set their minds to.

In the end, we should get the education out of the way of learning.

I guess I could have saved a lot of time and typing and summed it up in that one sentence. Damnit, I hate it when I do that.