Public schools are good at educating the average student.  We are good in the education of above average students.  We spend a lot of time, money, and energy on the education of below average students; and while this is a difficult population in terms of bringing them up to grade-level standards, we've made numerous improvements over the years to help these students.

       This leaves the most limited students and the very brightest students.  For the purposes of this post, I'm defining the very limited as the academically weakest two to three percent of our student population and the very brightest as our top 1% in terms of academic ability.  We have laws and programs and policies to help the most limited of our students.  They may not receive a high school diploma, but we help them to learn as much as possible during their school years so that they can have a full, happy, and satisfying life.  We help them to go as far as they can in terms of skills and abilities.  But when it comes to our very brightest students, I'm not sure that we can say the same.


        Once again, I'm not talking about the typical advanced students in our public schools.  We have programs and/or courses for them that are different from the typical "on-grade-level" programs.  And we do a good job with these typical above-average students.  I'm talking about our most advanced students.  These are the students who don't just stand out in their class, they stand out in their school.  They represent the 1 out of 100 (or more) that excel far beyond the typical advanced students.

       I am a mathematics supervisor.  Mathematics is the one subject that often gets the most attention when the topic of our very brightest students arises.  Parents and policy-makers alike strive to identify these students and endeavor to find a way that best meets their needs.  However all too often our attempts to do this lead to an inadequate solution known as "Acceleration".  Acceleration (in this arena) usually means that these very bright students get the same mathematics content and the same mathematics instruction as everyone else; they just get it at an earlier age and/or they just go through this same content at a faster pace than other students.

       The problem with this solution is that it does not recognize the true abilities of these students, and it does not encourage these students to think harder or reason more.  It doesn't challenge these students to grow and to further develop their strong academic skills.  Instead, this solution only pushes these students to go faster.  Sadly, this solution is often praised by parents and policymakers because our society views "faster" as "better".  We see everything as a competition and those that go faster and jump higher and earn more credits and produce higher grade-point-averages are viewed as the "winners".

       The real danger of inappropriate acceleration for our brightest students is that we place this "speed" over our prime objective of education; which is to actually learn.  Students lose the chance to develop a deep understanding of the content that they master.  They lose the chance to do what they are most able to do which is to question conclusions, discover new solutions, and to create and develop new ideas.  Strategic acceleration could accomplish these goals if the instruction is appropriately geared toward the needs of our brightest students.



       In practice, our public schools struggle with the top 1% because there are so few of them.   We don't have enough of them to make a "class"; sometimes there may not even be one in every grade.  They are spread out throughout a school district.  So we have to figure out a way to provide instruction that meets their needs while still attending to all of our other students.  This is a challenge--and (perhaps) is part of the reason that mere acceleration is so often employed as the "solution".  We also struggle to understand the best way to help teachers to provide this ideal instruction for these students.  So much of public education is geared toward helping our average and weak students; and less attention is geared toward our brightest students.

       The National Association of Gifted Children is a respected organization that addresses the needs of our brightest students and provides resources to help school districts to tackle this problem of providing for these students.  We need to do more and we need to do it in a smarter and more responsible way.


      

       How much is too much?


       Can you care too much?  Can you love too much?  Can you help too much?  When it comes to students and learning, sometimes teachers and parents help too much.

       Their hearts in the right place, but goals are short sighted.  Teachers and parents help too much when they tell students the answers in an effort for them to complete the classwork or the homework.  They seek the short-term goal of compliance with an assignment.  But they don't see the longer-term goal of helping students to learn how to learn.

       Educators have an expression for the results of too much help.  We call it, "Learned Helplessness".  It's when students learn to purposefully not try too hard because they know that a parent or a teacher or someone will eventually give them the answer or do the work for them.

       Since most students (and some adults) don't see or understand the benefits of learning, they believe that school is only a series of assignments that they have to complete because they are told to do so; or because they get a grade for completing it.  Therefore, they don't see the need to try hard and fail sometimes and learn from these failings and try again.  "Learning" isn't their goal; compliance is their goal.  Therefore they only seek to complete the worksheet, or answer the questions, or write the paper; because they only seek to get the grade.  And if the student can find someone else to do this--and the students basically gets the same reward (the same grade) either way--then the easy route is to let someone else do it.


       Of course teachers and parents want their students (and children) to succeed, so sometimes they provide this help in an effort to help them to get success.  But there is a terrible downside to too much help.  When the parent isn't there and the too-much-helping teacher isn't there, the child (maybe now a young adult) isn't able to solve problems on their own.  Since there was always someone there to do the hard stuff, the young adult is now either helpless or forced to learn how to learn new things at point in life when mistakes are more costly.  One area where this is often seen is the first year of college.  Students who haven't learned how to struggle to learn something new and expect someone else to do all of the hard stuff for them, fail and drop out of college.

       School is about learning; and it's about learning how to learn.  We aren't helping our kids by doing the work for them.  As teachers and as parents, we have to try to worry less about "the grade" and much, much more about the learning.  There is no benefit to children who graduate from high school but aren't able to think for themselves and make decisions by themselves and solve their own problems.

       Yes, you can help too much.