Unspecial Education

Many good educators-to-be choose as the focus of their efforts the underprivileged. In fact, admittedly without running a careful survey, I think most of the young people I know who want to go into education, want to go into “special education.” The special needs may be in terms of economic or social status, in terms of learning disabilities, in terms of mental problems, etc. Those with special needs are also the focus of many philanthropic organizations’ efforts and budget. For the sake of illustration, let’s pretend that the bottom 5% of students have good people looking after them. It’s never quite enough, of course, but people are making an effort. A heroic effort sometimes. “Heroic” is good.

At the other end of the bell-curve, there is much discussion about excellence, and some highly talented people put their time into discovering special potential, and helping it grow into spectacular career. Some education systems try to find the upper percentiles of the students, and provide them with some extracurricular opportunity. For the sake of illustration, let’s say that the top 5% of students benefit from some special attention. Again, we can always do more, but even with the limited level of such attention, we can sometimes see dramatic successes. “Dramatic” is good.

People like drama. Better yet, we like to be the heroes in a drama. That’s why many more of us go into the peace corp., rather than the potable water corp. or renewable energy corp. It’s more dramatic. That’s one reason they go into special ed. And not into “regular ed”. Take the best intentioned person, who wants to make a positive difference in a child’s life. It’s easy to see the difference-making when providing an underprivileged child with the special attention needed to allow them to live a full life. It is easy to see the difference-making when providing a prodigy with the special opportunities that can make them hugely successful. Tending to the bottom 5% and to the top 5% is very satisfying. What about the 90% in the middle?

If society’s goal is just to produce maximum achievements, it may be that society should invest much more in the top percentiles, less in the middle, and even less at the bottom. A bit of an Ayn Rand view. This is an extreme view, and I don’t subscribe to it.

If society’s goal is only to reduce gaps among people, it makes sense to invest much more in the bottom percentiles than around the middle and top. This is a more commonly professed view, but it is just as extreme as the Ayn Rand view, and I don’t subscribe to it.

To achieve a massive improvement, we would have to address also the main mass of people in the middle. We can try to do all three:

1. Keep the effort to lift the bottom percentiles in order to minimize gaps

2. Keep the effort to enable the best to push the envelope of human achievement

3. Have a stable focus on the main mass, to make being human a better deal

#1 and #2 are relatively easy, because of the dynamics described above. What about #3 – what about the 90% in the middle?

This part of an education revolution is not concerned with the special cases. It is concerned with the Unspecial case, and as such, it is not that easy to sell. How do we show that it is a worthwhile endeavor? One way is to ask people to look at themselves. Everybody feels special, but most people (though probably less than 90%) will recognize themselves as being somewhere within the middle 90%. It is easy to convince us that we should have received more. Another way is to ask people to look at their own children. Everybody knows their own children are special, but many would still recognize their children as being somewhere within the middle 90%. It is very easy to convince us that our children should receive more. Yet another way is to think in terms of “center of gravity.” Acting together to move the center of gravity by moving the main mass of as far as we can – that should be a good way to move ourselves as far as we can. This would take the thinking of people who are more special than I in terms of leadership.

A final thought about moving large masses:

Hitting a 45-gram golf ball and seeing it fly 300 meters is very dramatic and exciting. Rolling a 45 Kilogram cannonball along 30 centimeters is not that exciting. Let’s build a cannon.