At that point it doesn't really matter, because K is really about play and learning the conventions.
By the end of 2nd grade it was clear that they were bored out of their minds. So to private school they went.
For parents with kids that aren't motivated it's hard to understand what the fuss is.
But, the Left's problem is that instead of trying to raise everyone up they're bringing people down. It was that way in the USSR, and it's that way here. Where I used to live the Talented and Gifted program (which was state mandated) had a $1000 budget systemwide. The "equity" fund was almost a third of the budget. At that point why bother with public schools? It's taxation without representation.
This claim about the USSR seems strange to me.
In high school, I had a couple of classmates from the USSR and they had been attending advanced schools since childhood. They were brilliant mathematicians. The state-sponsored educational system had recognized their talents and lifted them up.
I understood the collapse of the Soviet Union to be a net loss for educational funding, but I am by no means sure of this.
I remember decades ago my undergrad statistics teacher pulling up some data on collegiate club (like chess and poker, not like ultimate frisbee) winnings in competition.
I forget what the point of the lecture was, something about data distribution types, but the takeaway was that Miami Dade Community college consistently punched above its weight class since it educated a population that was on average subject to more USSR style "identify those gifted in a niche and develop their skills" than the baseline.
That said, there's a reason those people were attending community college in Miami...
>an engineer or a scientist would earn not much more than a blue collar worker.
The blue collar trades were preferred because you had more opportunities to get stuff to barter, better still if your job involved going out and about and doing things, you could meet many people to transact with.
It’s not because he “works hard,” and I don’t tiger parent. There’s just smart kids and average kids and dumb kids.
My mom nearly fell out of her chair. What 3rd grade teacher has 3rd grade math problems they need a 3rd grader’s help with?!
My mom got me a math tutor literally the next day, and I’ve never been more thankful (in hindsight). That tutor focused on teaching me advanced math (for my age), and suddenly my behavior improved. Funny that.
So my recommendation would be, if possible, find a math tutor for enrichment. I don’t mean “start studying for the SAT,” so hopefully don’t take it that way. :)
Whether or not to cut gifted and talented programs is very much debated on the "left".
One analog in my area (Boston) is perhaps METCO, where ambitious students in impoverished districts can be bussed to wealthier suburban schools. It's fairly benign compared with the infamous forced bussing of the 1970s- a judge forced lower class black and white parts of the city to bus students to each other's schools in order to eliminate segregation- it caused riots. Sure there was racism, but the main complaint was that rich suburban towns were not included.
Another ongoing debate is over "charter schools"- where public funds are used for private schools that can be selective about their students. There are good arguments both for and against them. One against is that they can be for-profit even though they are not supposed to be. For example, they often pay rent to somebody- this never happens as far as I know for public schools.
what makes me question what you’re saying even more is i have right-wing friends who most certainly do not want more funding for any school programs, including gifted. and i have classical liberal friends who think we should give tax breaks for private schools for “gifted”.
This is a strawman, though it may not seem like one. I agree that much of the right wants less funding for public education in general, and/or wants more funding for parochial schools and the like. But that is not who I'm talking about.
Those on the right who support public education also support funding gifted/talented schools/programs, because they base it on 'merit' and you may have seen that word thrown around recently by that orange guy. G&T programs explicity fit into their policy and world view, albeit for all the wrong reasons.
> i have classical liberal friends who think we should give tax breaks for private schools for “gifted”.
Cool, but they're not 'left' by the American standards. Classical liberals are more akin to American libertarians in terms of beliefs/opinions. Which again, is not who I'm talking about.
Anyone who thinks money is the limiting factor in education is either delusional or is receiving a chunk of that money that never makes it into the classroom.
Countries all over the planet provide superior education to students for a tenth of the cost.
Your right wing friends are correctly but ambiguously stating that if we can’t have a gifted program at these funding levels, there will never be a gifted program at any funding level.
Right the USSR was famously known to not aggressively coach and foster young talent in math, physics, and chess. There's literally no prodigies from there.
Both US political parties have pushed for educational reforms that have resulted in this sort of accusation.
There was a long running idea on the right that faltering education was a national security threat, and naturally parents want their kids to have a decent education. Things changed a bit after George W. Bush's "No Child Left Behind" ended up extremely unpopular, but you still hear some of the same talking points.
Was the left operating well in missussippu prior to 2013?
All while still remaining the poorest state in the nation no less.
In large part due to the Literacy-Based Promotion Act, sponsored by state Republicans that got bi-partisan support except for a faction of state house Democrats that tried to kill the bill because they didn't come up with it.
It was so effective that the model was copied successfully by other states.
You could not have chosen a worse example to prove your point.
But, definitely evidencd of improvement.
Harrison Bergeron
==
"Having witnessed my own friends, I simply do not believe that people who can juggle exist."
.
Gifted kids exist. I see friends' kids who read at 4 and they absolutely do not need to be stuck in a class with kids who still chew on their toys. The fact that you have not seen those does not mean they do not exist.
As a second example, I was able to read before I was 4 and multiply 2-digit numbers before I was 5. Luckily schools did have programs that challenged me. I would have been much less lucky, had I been a kid in Mamdani's NYC...
Its worse than that; putting them in that class forces them into a situation where their only options are abject boredom (which kills motivation, drive, creativity) or to act out, because it is at least better than being bored.