The case for expanding rather than eliminating gifted education programs (2021)

Re:The case for expanding rather than eliminating gifted edu... by hedora on Wednesday June 08, 2022 @05:09PM (#31674223)

I'm all for equity of opportunity. However, the people California has chosen to set our curriculum are explicitly working toward equality of outcome.

They say they don't believe that any children are more talented than any other children, and are advocating eliminating standard "advanced" courses, such as calculus, from the high school curriculum. The only classes that would be available in their proposal are the current remedial math track.

I think you've confused "straw man argument created by its detractors" with "the actual concrete plan being established by its proponents".

The (successful) proponents of equity based teaching are so far outside the mainstream that it's an honest mistake. (I made it, and now I'm furious.)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The case for expanding rather than eliminating gifted edu... by wbsss4412 on Wednesday June 08, 2022 @05:38PM (#31674643)

I’m not intimately familiar with all of the details of what is being advocated in California. All I can speak to is my perspective on what equity is and how I think it should be applied.

People who disagree with the basic concepts around equity tend to view the entire discourse as a monolith, but people are actually allowed to have different opinions on what is actually equitable and what isn’t.

Personally I wouldn’t support doing away with advanced math courses either. But just because someone does that in the name of equity, doesn’t mean I think equity itself is bad. I’m able to separate the two.

[ Parent | on HN ]