[TimTheTinker]

They're thinking that teaching people stuff is promoting a diversity of outcomes, which is anathema at the moment.

Diversity is supposed to only extend as far as categories one mustn't use to discriminate (age, race, sex, religion, etc.). If it occurs in other areas (achievement level, ability in particular subjects) ... oooh that's bad. Must make it stop.

[holonomically]

I don't understand what this means. Where I went to school there were no gifted programs but we all were doing algebra and word problems much earlier than in the US. If people want consistent outcomes then teach everyone the same thing and hold everyone up to the same standards by investing more resources in students that are underachieving. That to me seems like a much better way of equalizing outcomes.

[TimTheTinker]

If you teach "hard" things to average US public school students, a minority of them will excel as a result. The rest will nod off, get bored, not pay attention, and not benefit.

So it benefits a minority (those who care) and differentiates them from the rest -- that's what they don't like. Because those who care come from "privileged" backgrounds more often than not, thus perpetuating the gap between privileged and non-privileged.

[holonomically]

I still don't follow. What exactly in what I suggested is the problem with equalizing outcomes? If everyone is learning the same things then what exactly is the problem? There is no discrimination involved.

[TimTheTinker]

"Equalizing outcomes" is exactly what they want to do.

They seek to accomplish this by pulling down those who would otherwise excel, not by solving the real problems that are preventing people from excelling in the first place.

Part of the problem is that outcomes can never be equalized. It's a fallacy to try to force everyone into the same educational mold. A statistical normal distribution will always occur.

Better to remove impediments that are keeping people from excelling -- things like poverty, crime, etc. would be a great place to start.

[holonomically]

What's the fallacy in teaching everyone the same things? That seems like a good way to equalize life outcomes and give everyone the required skills for succeeding in contemporary society.

[thereisnospork]

In order to teach everyone the same thing you can only teach as much as the stupidest and least motivated person can grasp.

[tppiotrowski]

My interpretation:

When most kids can’t do algebra, the teacher invests most of their time into helping those students catch up. Because most of the teachers time is now going to students who don’t understand algebra, algebra gets dropped all together. Minority high achievers who were capable of understanding algebra now feel that they are held back by low achievers.

High achievers should probably check out Khan Academy or similar…

[holonomically]

Yes, this is probably what is happening. Schools are understaffed and underfunded so programs keep getting cut. At this point it really just might be better to let kids learn from Khan Academy since the adults clearly have no idea what they're doing.

[kyboren]

> Schools are understaffed and underfunded

Please stop parroting this talking point. It's just not true. California schools are funded at record levels--$18k p.a. per pupil[0].

[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27563357

[holonomically]

Then maybe it should be $36k.