Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Alex K. Chen's avatar

LOOK UP SENG!!

I would also add:

Anything by Julian Stanley (the founder of CTY and CTY SET). He was also a signatory on "mainstream science on intelligence" (as well as other signaturies on Mainstream Science on Intelligence). The CTY SET program (probably the most comprehensive national studies of talent and supports those who achieved 700+ subscore SATs in 7th grade) also is one of the most well-developed studies on the gifted [it has found that there are no diminishing reuturns to higher levels o fintelligence]. I heard they used to have an online community. I know a couple of people who went to CTY SET in WA.

Also DUKE TIP

Back issues of CTY imagine have been supportive of the gifted

Subotnik. Also Lubinski and Benbow

tokenadult in Minnesota [who used to frequent Art of Problem Solving] wrote a website called https://learninfreedom.org/ and homeschooled all his 5 children.

Rena Subotnik’s Genius Revisited:

High IQ Children Grown Up (Subotnik, Kassan,

Summers, & Wasser, 1993

This is old but might have a few gems: https://inquilinekea-education-disruption.quora.com/

https://web.archive.org/web/20090208094253/http://earlyentrance.org/Comparison_Chart (old comparison of early entrance programs).

https://robinsoncenter.uw.edu/research-resources/publications/

Cognito Mentoring

Over time they have also gotten influenced by "wokism" (UW Robinson Center and many other gifted programs [TJ also being a casualty] have become more "woke" now than they used to be, from what I heard).

Stanford EPGY also used to be way better, and CTY doesn't have the cultural capital it used to have (a lot of the cultural capital has now been replaced by programs like SPARC which are totally independent from the gifted education communities that Julian Stanley/Linda Gottfredson and Lubinski/Benhow hung out in [nevermind Halbert and Nancy Robinson of UW long ago])

Read some Nan Waldman answers on Quora.

Expand full comment
Kevin P's avatar

No specific articles to recommend, but my biggest reaction to the list is that it's very focused on the US, or to a lesser extent the Anglosphere. Other countries are much more focused on tracking and streaming students, with China being the most obvious example.

A couple of the articles you posted reference China as an inspiration when it comes to teaching methods, and Chua's book talks about the experience of putting small children into the Chinese system for a short period, but I didn't see anything that addresses the level of ability-based segmentation in Chinese high schools.

I'm sure there must be plenty of research about the effect of Olympic classes / key-point high schools / academic-vocational distinction etc. This would be stronger evidence that looking at a handful of elite schools in the US because it's system-wide rather than based on a few outliers. It would also give some useful information on the downsides of the system in practice.

Expand full comment
8 more comments...

No posts