New York City’s policies regarding monitoring gifted and talented children raised concern. Schools administered tests in order to find bright and talented students. In this case, it was to protect the intelligence of the pupils as it could be beneficial in the future. This is a bad way to manage the school system and a child’s education. It is hard for educators to use standardized exams to classify students because of the diverse talents that people have.
Learning is a natural ability of humans. Foucault uses the analogy for the submissive physique. His theory suggests that humans can now be made into any shape or form they desire. Foucault, 2007, says that the “body which has been controlled and moulded and taught” is one that obeys, responds and becomes proficient and strong. The body is not the actual physical component of the saying. It is not possible to classify pupils by the content of this article. The human mind is, especially at toddler age, a tabula rasa. Wisdom can only be developed through extensive experience. Some children may not be brilliant because of their childhoods, which is something that many stakeholders such as the ones who promote the monitoring of gifted and talented children don’t know. Both privileged and less fortunate people can be successful in this life.
However, the student’s “talented” and “gifted” status is outside of the control of their instructor. In this case, however, it is important for all stakeholders to improve the environment. The environment discussion isn’t limited to classrooms; it encompasses all aspects of life. Dewey (1916), for example, states that changes in education and traditions will not be viewed as creations by individual teachers. This is an example of education being a collaborative process where all stakeholders are included. It is not the intention to have instructors preoccupied about labeling students average or talented learners. This is a way to make it easier for instructors.