| HN Mirror

Y	Hacker News new \| ask \| show \| jobs


	by 8f2ab37a-ed6c 1376 days ago
	I'm guessing there's a big ick factor to separating kids into "smarter" and "not that smart" groups. It feels inequitable, undemocratic, it goes against the commonly accepted blank slate hypothesis. People will say that if kids show different outcomes, the teachers just haven't tried hard enough, or that the state hasn't spent enough on them.

1 comments

I'm willing to bet most gifted kids are born in the first half of the year, and most not so smart ones in the second half.

Same in sports by the way: most "gifted" players are born at the start of the year: https://www.google.com/amp/s/fivethirtyeight.com/features/wh...

Conclusion: at young ages, you should be very careful what you call "gifted" when you place kids with almost 1 year difference in the same group.

Link with google removed.

(whenever you copy and paste it, you can just delete the "www.google.com/amp/s/" part and the URL will now point to the real website.)

Pure bullshit, I was top 1% in school and I was born in December

A single case doesn't invalidate the statistics of a larger group. You being top 1% should know that.

My n=1 is that I was always both the youngest and the smartest.