That's why I'm drilling down on the definition of "need"
I like this train of thought. It leads to another great question or drilldown. If we're going to talk about needs we need to talk about it in relation to a goal. Is the goal...
1. To raise all childrens' education to some sort of minimally acceptable bar? (like the equivalent of a GED here in the USA)
2. To get as many kids as possible as close to their individual educational potential as possible, for humanistic and/or societal reasons?
3. Something else?
If it's the first option, then gifted children probably do not have a "need" as urgent as developmentally-challenged kids. If it's the second option, I think that gifted children do have an equally urgent need.
The second option is admittedly loftier, and to be frank, the first option aligns more closely with the way most laws function. But god damn, I think we really should be aiming for the second option.
Strictly agree with your question.. i think it's similar to, and at the same level of importance as, the classic trilemma of criminal justice: prevention, rehabilitation, or revenge.
1. To raise all childrens' education to some sort of minimally acceptable bar? (like the equivalent of a GED here in the USA)
2. To get as many kids as possible as close to their individual educational potential as possible, for humanistic and/or societal reasons?
3. Something else?
If it's the first option, then gifted children probably do not have a "need" as urgent as developmentally-challenged kids. If it's the second option, I think that gifted children do have an equally urgent need.
The second option is admittedly loftier, and to be frank, the first option aligns more closely with the way most laws function. But god damn, I think we really should be aiming for the second option.