Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: OT: "Special needs" (Was Michael Adams/Abrigon (Was [OT] Books for sanskrit self-study))

From:Tristan Alexander McLeay <conlang@...>
Date:Tuesday, July 18, 2006, 1:31
If you/anyone must continue this discussion, please do so offlist ---
and *don't* cc me.


On 18/07/06, Sai Emrys <sai@...> wrote:
> On 7/17/06, Mark J. Reed <markjreed@...> wrote: > > On 7/17/06, Henrik Theiling <theiling@...> wrote: > > > Is this a serious question? > > > > Yes. > > What he said. > > > > You would probably find it strange to collect money for the rich. > > > > What I find is that you are using an extremely inapplicable and > > offensive analogy. > > Ditto. > > > > If the challenged are well-supported, the smart ones should have > > > access to enough books, though, for feeding any interest and keeping > > > them from getting bored. > > > > Once they're old enough, sure - assuming that their experiences within > > the educational system haven't destroyed their desire to learn > > altogether. > > > > There's a reason many school systems have a special program for > > "gifted" children. Assuming that your goal is to educate the > > students, then dealing with them is as serious a problem as reaching > > the children who are slower than normal for whatever reason. > > *nod* > > To elaborate on that somewhat: I don't want to touch the subject of > *priority* - as noted by Christian, that's a 'social justice' sort of > sensitive question that I don't think really applies. > > But to answer to the point... Sure, now that I am an adult and have > access to a world of information, classes, college textbooks, etc etc > on my own time, the "you're smart enough, teach yourself" argument > applies. > > But when I was a kid, I didn't. I was by law required to go to school, > an institution that did very little to educate me, and whose social > "education" would only prepare one for life in prison, not the real > world (where we have things like laws, and meritocracies, and real > lives that we engage in because we want to). It's a mistake to assume > that a kid, even a hyperintelligent one, is any more developed in the > aspect of being able to teach themselves than others are; that's a > skill. One that takes time to learn, and one that (if anything) school > teaches you NOT to learn. > > And y'know - I read lots and lots of books when I was a kid. Literally > you could not find me without three in my posession, and one in front > of my nose, if I was awake (and possibly when I was asleep too :-P). > But that's hardly the same thing as an education; hardly the same > thing as being taught properly. I didn't really educate myself; I read > for fun, not so much for knowledge - because I didn't know what > knowledge *would* be fun. > > IMHO as someone who's been there, the "let smart kids figure things > out themselves despite the system" is a terrible disservice. > > - Sai >