>See this large overview of the research, including what >some other countries do: > >"Radical acceleration and early entry to college: A >review of the research" >http://www.davidsongifted.org/db/Articles_id_10349.aspx > >Quote: "Radical acceleration addresses the needs of >students who can move at an extremely fast pace through >the prescribed school curriculum. Where IQ is cited, >these students are, in general, exceptionally (IQ 160- >179) or profoundly (IQ 180+) gifted."
Thank you for the citation. People new to the subject certainly have a good starting place with this item. Note that the Davidson Institute focuses on the "profoundly gifted" http://www.davidsongifted.org/Article/Our_Founders_316.aspx so Davidson provides one important, but necessarily narrow, view of the educational landscape. As always, the international comparisons are tiresome.
>(And yes, I am for having special programs for the >gifted like we have special education programs for the >opposite end of the spectrum. But you must understand >that your taxes would have to go up quite a bit if >we were to spend as much for the gifted as we we spend >for the disabled. You are OK with your local and state >taxes going up that much to pay for all that? In other >words, you would be willing to tell conservatives >running for state government that they should not sign >that no new taxes at all costs pledge? It's one thing >to promote that government should do this and that, but >it's another thing to actually be willing to pay for >it.)
You are, of course, speaking for yourself. I am against "special programs" for the gifted. It costs no extra money to give a 3rd grade child a 4th grade textbook or even to <GASP!> put him into a 4th grade class.
Acceleration aside, Stuyvesant High School runs on a completely average budget. Ditto for Bard High School Early College, Brooklyn Latin, Mark Twain Middle School and every other school (few in number that they are) that actually teaches an academic curriculum. Academic programs are cheap to run, which is why the Education Mafia has instead psychologized education and pathologized the academically able.
On the other side, apologists for the Education Mafia have yet to excuse the inexcusable, like the law that forbids students to qualify for the GED before their age cohorts graduate high school. Unless you can produce one spectacular explanation, this law can only be understood as one more way for the Education Mafia to extort money out of the public fisc, as their main aim, and to destroy children's lives as "unfortunate" collateral damage.