From: hrubin@pop.stat.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin)
Subject: Re: Branding kids, IQ tests, smart vs dumb
Organization: Purdue University Statistics Department
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 19:34:17 GMT

In article <1993Jan20.181547.6283@seachg.uucp> chrisb@seachg.UUCP (Chris Blask) writes:
>In article <C12AzC.MB1@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> hrubin@pop.stat.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) writes:
>>In article <1993Jan18.152035.10261@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> ren@hopper.ACS.Virginia.EDU (Karen Prestemon) writes:
>>>In article <1993Jan17.192113.26691@sequent.com> petel@sequent.com (Pete Lancashire) writes:

			...................

>>What do you expect the bright to do in school?  There is little which
>>they are faced with which requires more than slight effort.  Usually 
>>they are not even allowed to do more.  

>>They definitely should be faced with situations which are too difficult
>>for them to manage.  Some will be due to lack of background, and some
>>will just be beyond their capabilities.  This is all to the good.  But
>>it will not happen in our current system, which assumes that everything
>>is straightforward.  Even if memory is not their strong point, almost
>>all of the bright are not weak at it, and that is all that is tested now.

>Hi folks!

>Sorry to jump right in without seeing a FAQ or anything, but I have to
>comment.  Please excuse any redundancy, I'm sure this won't be TOO
>original.

>The social aspect of the 'smart kid syndrome' is the topic of this little
>diatribe, most of which will be autobiographical.

>The goal of the system should encompass not only the academic education, but 
>also the social education of kids.  The extra attention I received from
>instructors was a lead-pipe-cinch to ruin any chance of being accepted by
>the other kids.  I had scored right at the top of all the charts, and the
>staff made that entirely clear to the other students (like I didn't have
>enough trouble just being a kid).  I spent two years being beaten up (fifth and 
>sixth) before moving to Chicago, where I made a conscious decision to lower my 
>grades.  I practiced there for two years, then moved to Toronto, where I 
>perfected the technique; failing three highschool classes, gaining great 
>popularity, then dropping out. 

So your talents have been at least greatly diminished, if not destroyed by
the system.  Would this have happened if even the pre-1930 system of rapid
advancement was in place, not that that is ideal?  You would have been in
clases with children several years older, and yes, you would have not fit
into the social group, but it is unlikely that you would have been beaten. 
As adults, we are not thrown into a group, we end up in groups of people
with similar interests.  

What should have been done with you was to send you to a school designed 
for those with your talents; the same educational resources we are frittering
away on frills and hyperegalitarianism can be used, when there is again an
adequate suppy of competent teachers, to develop the brains of all children
who are allowed by their communities to develop them.

But even if the other kids were more respectful, there is no way that you
belonged in a so-called normal class at any age.  Those groups which do
not value academic excellence will not many produce scholars, no matter
how much ability they have, and if they act like the other children were
allowed to act with you, they will produce very few. 

Our school money is wasted in trying to do more than the minimum for those
who do not wish to learn, or who cannot learn.  Our future scientists,
technical leaders, and even teachers :-) must come from those who can think
and reason, and who will have to be aware that not everyone else is the same.
-- 
Herman Rubin, Dept. of Statistics, Purdue Univ., West Lafayette IN47907-1399
Phone: (317)494-6054
hrubin@snap.stat.purdue.edu (Internet, bitnet)  
{purdue,pur-ee}!snap.stat!hrubin(UUCP)
Newsgroups: misc.education