[thebspatrol]

>Gifted students can help raise up their less gifted classmates.

Gifted students can often also be held back by their less gifted classmates, and feel a sense of isolation from being different. Gifted students with a stimulation-seeking kick also do not work well at all with traditional education.

Industrial-revolution-era ideas about school are terrible as far as i'm concerned, and made education a very sour experience for me once the novelty of going to school wore off.

I'm all for the notion that segregation of education is a bad idea (taxes that benefit only one's immediate district are terrible), but I totally don't buy into the notion that smart kids have anything to gain by being taught the way average and dumb kids have to be.

Also, this is anecdotal and field-dependent, but after high school you really do kind of live in a vacuum. In software especially, it feels like everyone kind of fits the archetype.

[mulmen]

Sure, I'm not advocating for the status quo here. I just don't think segregation is the solution. All students struggle in our current education system so I think we need to solve that problem at the root rather than focus on just one symptom of a broken system.

Gifted students should get what they need just like everyone else.

I don't think a segregated system is good for anyone and the vacuum chamber you mention after high school is a problem in my opinion. We should all learn to seek diverse viewpoints for our entire lives.

[Kalium]

You may find that very often, what gifted students need is to be separated from their less gifted peers for more appropriate instruction.

The solution and approach you described earlier is the one currently in use in a great many places. Indeed, it's the default approach in general, because it requires no efforts whatsoever on the part of the schools, faculty, or staff.

[mulmen]

Please do not misunderstand, I do not think the current system is working, I just don't think segregation is the solution.

[Kalium]

I understand. I agree! The current system is not working for anyone. I also think that the system you have described, in which gifted students are placed with their less gifted peers to raise them up, is identical to the current system. What you have described is literally identical to a system we have just agreed does not work.

As a result, I believe that what you describe does not work.

[mulmen]

I'm honestly not even sure what such a system would look like so I think you are jumping to conclusions. I just don't think segregated schools are the solution.

I think we need to rethink the entire system. Every student learns differently and at a different pace so forcing everyone into the exact same experience isn't going to work. Maybe there is a case for more advanced opportunities based on academic (or athletic, or any other criteria) achievement. I don't think that requires an entirely separate school.

[Kalium]

You've described a system in which gifted and less gifted students are taught together with the express goal being for the gifted students to "raise up" their less gifted peers. If I've mistaken you and you did not suggest that, please accept my deepest apologies for the mistake.

You're absolutely right that every student is a unique individual. You want to teach students individually. One of the drawbacks of this is that the gifted will not reliably be positioned to raise up their less gifted peers, as divergence in individual instruction compounds over time.

I've seen schools that offer advanced opportunities based on academic or athletic criteria. In practice, they tend to look like gifted students in AP or IB courses and their less gifted peers in other courses. You don't need separate schools to get de facto segregation - all it takes is a series of advanced opportunities on offer.

With all this in mind, how do you propose to offer gifted students opportunities and material equal to their abilities while keeping them available and relevant to help raise up their less gifted classmates?