Replies

I don't think education reformers believe that they raise the IQ's of children by any significant degree. They want to educate the children to top levels of their various abilities. Am I missing something? Who is the target of his article?

Good question. I believe that he makes a few points here (I'm no mind reader, but I believe he would agree if one reads between the lines and is familiar with the body of his work):

1) Let's not place unreal expectations on individuals. Not everyone can be an astrophysicist, molecular biologist or actuary. For that matter, neither can everyone be a professional athlete or Broadway star. Let's have this fact reflected in our approach to education.
2) Let's not place unreal expectations on our education establishment. Focus on dealing with realistic goals and alter those for people with different abilities.

The schools are trying to make everyone a scholar. When my children went to grammar school, I knew many kids who were being stuck with all kinds of labels because they could not perform up to "expectations". Anyone with enough humanity to see them as they were would have seen that it was not there. When these low achievers went to high school, most of them dropped out or went to alternative high schools.
Modern educational theory assumes that all people can learn anything or are equally talented. That is utter nonsense. It also assumes that teachers can teach a classroom with mildly retarded children through gifted; this is not possible either. Tracking is supposed to be a form of discrimination, but not tracking is the real discrimination. In an untracked class, the smartest are held back and the slowest never catch up. And if you believe that a teacher can effectively teach a mixed class, I have a bridge in Brooklyn with your name on it. Modern educational ideas have made it impossible for most teachers to teach effectively and for most kids to learn.