Thread by @smarick

I wrote a book about gifted education, so here's a very quick thread about what might be a very, very bad decision by Mayor de Blasio to get rid of gifted education programs.

nytimes.com/2019/08/26/nyr…

1/

(Here's a .pdf of the book in case you're curious.) philanthropyroundtable.org/docs/default-s…

2/

One of the under-appreciated and unfortunate facts about K-12 policy, especially the national discussion about K-12 policy, is how little attention is paid to gifted programming.

There aren't federal programs aimed at gifted kids. There are remarkably few state programs.

3/

We don't have consistent systems for identifying gifted kids. And even when there are systems for identification, there are often no clear paths for the kids identified. That is, a policy might require identification but NOT require special programming.

4/

There are some state-run schools for gifted kids; some specialty high schools; some philanthropic work. But we simply don't have the policies & programs that you'd expect for kids achieving at very, very high levels.

In the book, I suggest reasons that might be the case...

5/

But regardless of the reasons why we don't pay as much attention to this, it can absolutely be the case that a child with unusual abilities doesn't have access to special teachers, courses, supports, etc.

6/

NYC is unusual because it has a long, twisting, fascinating history of specialty (often known as "selective admission") high schools for high-performing students. I recommend this podcast episode where @elizashapiro explains much of the background. nytimes.com/2019/04/02/pod…

7/

There are very real, very difficult questions--in NYC and beyond--about the fairness of the systems that identify kids for these programs. And not all primary schools enable all high-ability young kids to reach their potential so they can place into these high schools.

8/

We should absolutely address those issues.

But the reason I started with the fact that there are far fewer gifted-ed programs than you might think is that bringing about more fairness shouldn't be accomplished by torpedoing the gifted programs we do have.

9/

That is, our solution to unequal access to gifted programs should NOT be "Let's make gifted programs equally inaccessible to everyone in public education systems."

That would be bad for lots and lots of reasons.

10/

Not to bore everyone with all of the details, but, for instance, if public schools aren't offering special gifted programs, more families with financial means who are in the public education system will have more reason to choose non-public schools.

11/

Also, because our K-12 accountability systems focus on getting kids to "proficient" (or grade-level achievement), teachers and administrators have incentives to focus attention on kids needing help reaching that level... not on kids already way above that level.

12/

In short, NYC (& other places) should resist the urge to undermine gifted education in the name of equity. High-performing kids deserve special attention, too. There are too few such programs to begin with, & lots of kids, including disadvantaged kids, benefit from them.

13/14

Finally: One reason, I believe, we have so few gifted programs is we want public ed to be egalitarian & leveling, so special attention to soaring kids can feel wrong. But true educational equity doesn't mean giving everyone the same; it means providing each child what s/he needs.