An IQ or an SAT test is more reflective of the student’s ability to take a test, and you can change the result simply by prepping for the exam. Which means it has no inherent value, because they are not checking the talent of the child but their ability to prepare for the exam, which can be heavily influenced by socioeconomic status.
If a child is hungry, if they are neglected or abused, if they have poor instructors or dangerous schools that can absolutely influence their test results. And that has nothing to do with the god given talents they may possess and could express given a better environment.
Wealthier kids are allowed to express their talents because they have fewer shackles on them environmentally.
It really doesn’t purely academic career are not the best paying.
my friend has a master degree in biology I make twice as much and I’m dumb as a rock.
Not true. The first step is to complete your education. Even in poor schools the teachers will let you do advanced work if you can. The dropout rate is much, much higher in poor areas than rich. Nobody can complain about being poor if they drop out of school.
From my POV, and to an extent, what our community more or less agreed with is, a ‘program’ just sets up this all or nothing dichotomy. Either the student is ‘in’ and is on a tract to take advanced courses, or they are ‘out’ and can not. ultimately we rejected gifted and continued with what our school system does, which is allow kids to tract advanced in any discipline they show aptitude for. We still have WAY to many AP courses IMO, but AP is almost a totally different conversation - one that I would be happy to have…
The advanced classes are still populated nearly exclusively with affluent members of our community and the school is still ripe with the hyper competitiveness at Torey spoke to, but at least we don’t have a special club for the smart kids.
All you’re doing is providing exceptions to general statistical truths.
Of course altair should be a bit more careful to qualify his statements as statistical realities. But anyone of minimal common sense would know they are not actually ABSOLUTE statements. I expect you are among those who truly know it too. Please don’t prove me wrong on that.
If you read Freakonomics they actually broke this down. It’s not single parent families or even having books in the house that truly make a young person succeed in school.
It’s simply the socioeconomic status of the parents, whether they are together or apart.
This is terrible advice (bolded above). I provide placement testing and register students into courses, including 7-12 grade for our CCP (College Credit Plus) classes. To place anyone into courses they’re not likely able to pass is setting them up to fail. Their GPA could get trashed, their confidence stepped on, screw up Financial Aid or scholarships, and will lead to higher incidences of dropping out. There’s absolutely nothing wrong with extra tassels and pendants during one’s commencement ceremony either. Goodness folks work hard to earn those.
Further, a parent who dropped out of school is not as likely to be able to help his/her kid with schoolwork and homework as one who succeeded in finishing school. And a single parent isn’t going to have as much time to give to the kid at home.
This discussion reminds me of the premise behind trading places. Is it nurture or nature? I don’t believe intelligence guarantees success or that lack thereof guarantees failure. People may be born with better abilities than others, but if they grow up in an environment that doesn’t encourage that ability, then they may spend their lives in poverty. On the other hand, someone of perhaps lesser natural ability in the right environment may become far more successful that people who are much smarter.
It seems to me their ought to be consistent criteria that is used to qualify students for gifted classes. GPA, aptitude and attitude would be some good guidelines.
Injecting race or socioeconomic status into the considerations, whether it’s denying students admittance into gifted classes or admitting less qualified students in to fill race or other quotas is wrong. But when libs are involved, social justice and political correctness trump’s every other factor, including common sense.
This has got to be being done for wrong reasons by just knowing libs are doing it…
