Failures of Anti-Merit Educational Experiments

Anti-merit education experiments from the 2010s and early 2020s face criticism and a lack of popularity. These programs aim to reform educational systems but are seen by many as unsuccessful. Efforts to downplay or dismiss the importance of merit in education have met significant skepticism.

City Journal, a publication by the Manhattan Institute focusing on urban policy, has highlighted such criticisms. Writer Neetu Arnold points out the controversial nature of these programs. In particular, the debates surrounding gifted education have become more extreme.

An example from New York involves writer Katie Arnold-Ratliff, who recently challenged the concept of student giftedness. Her argument was based on a study showing that merely 12.3 percent of gifted students reached a level of eminence by age 50. This finding implies that the majority, or 88 percent, did not achieve prominent success, like becoming Fortune 500 executives or renowned journalists.

This argument fuels ongoing debates about the value of gifted education programs. Many question whether these programs truly lead to the extraordinary outcomes they promise. The increasing scrutiny and skepticism around these education experiments indicate a need to reassess their effectiveness and impact.