[JesseK]

Originally Posted by sanddrag

Another fundamental flaw of education is that to a large degree we group all the students together at random as if they are all equals. They are not. Imagine how much further ahead we'd be if we took all the bright students and put them together, and didn't have to slow them down by placing them in classes with failing students. I think sometimes equality goes too far.

And regardless of smartness or intelligence, what about the simple desire to be there? I'd venture to guess approximately half of high-school students don't want to be in school or don't see the point. Why should the rest of everyone have to deal with them? Put them in their own school and let everyone else move on. Of course, I have no idea what the societal impacts of a such an idea would be.

There should be more schools for people who are determined to learn. A place where those with a desire to learn do not have to be surrounded by the ones without such a desire. One of the reasons FIRST works so well is that all the people who do it want to. The same can't be said for most high school classes.

Now don't get me wrong, I'm not saying we should leave behind mediocre or poor students. What I am saying though is that it makes no sense for a Ferrari to be stuck behind a dump truck on a single-lane road.

Today I read an article at Wired and was reminded of your post. It's about the Kahn Academy (rather long). Here's an interesting excerpt (emphasis mine):

Originally Posted by Clive Thompson, Wired Magazine

Even if Khan is truly liberating students to advance at their own pace, it’s not clear that the schools will be able to cope. The very concept of grade levels implies groups of students moving along together at an even pace. So what happens when, using Khan Academy, you wind up with a kid in fifth grade who has mastered high school trigonometry and physics—but is still functioning like a regular 10-year-old when it comes to writing, history, and social studies? Khan’s programmer, Ben Kamens, has heard from teachers who’ve seen Khan Academy presentations and loved the idea but wondered whether they could modify it “to stop students from becoming this advanced.”

Wouldn't want there to be a solution that allows an unfair advantage, would we? </sarcasm>

Originally Posted by Trevor

I fear the reason this does not get addressed more often is because, unlike other things which are merely nearly impossible to change, this is impossible to change. When 50% of marriages end in divorce, single parent households are inevitable. When it is now the norm for both parents to work, kids having too much unsupervised time is inevitable. When people expect the school to do everything, it is inevitable.

Quite true. In the last 5 years I've had 2 roomates and 1 close friend who taught/teach elementary school. One of the patterns I sorta realized from them venting about their day or discussing anonymous child A is that if the child was really struggling then usually the parents were very hands-off. In one (most likely rare) case the parent literally did expect her to teach her child better behavior and correct for mistakes at home.