THE AVERAGE STUDENT

 This article is from "The Wilkie Way" February Newsletter and posted with permission by Charlotte Wilkinson

The Average Student

Something to think about as we head down the road of teaching all students in a year group the same
content and new standardized testing.
We’re so accustomed to using averages that we neglect to question whether they’re actually useful. The
End of Average by Todd Rose argues that, when we use averages to judge people, we typically arrive at
inaccurate and harmful conclusions.
(Rose is a developmental psychologist, former Harvard professor)

Rose asserts that one of the areas of society in which judging individuals with averages has done the most damage is the modern education system. Rather than give each student what they individually need to learn the most, we give them a standardized experience that forces them to conform or fail. As a result, students and society both suffer.

Consider what is happening in New Zealand and the politics behind the changes. “What is driving alot of what I’m doing - is that equity piece”(Listener Jan 31 - Feb 6 2026 - Educating Erica). The premise is that the changes being made are to ensure that everyone can live up to their full potential. There is no argument that knowledge is essential but is the knowledge the only aspect to be considered?

According to Rose, our education system is a deeply flawed sorting mechanism because it’s founded on
the false assumption that “general intelligence” exists. We use standardized tests because we assume that students who are better at quickly solving math problems or reasoning through logic puzzles are generally“smarter” than others. In other words, we think they’ll be better at solving all problems than their less“gifted” counterparts. Instead of judging students based on individual skills, we average out their various skills into one-dimensional scores that supposedly reflect their general intelligence.

However, research shows that such scores of general intelligence are completely inaccurate. Rose argues that if you ever judge someone as “generally smart,” you’re probably mistaken. That’s because someone who’s good at one intellectual task is no more likely than anyone else to be good at another intellectual task. For this reason, a student’s standardized test scores or grade point average don’t reliably predict their performance at other tasks, or in their future career.If a student is gifted in ways a standardized test can’t measure, the system incentivizes them to struggle to succeed in the same way as everyone else instead of nurturing the talents they have. This is not only demoralizing for individuals, but also damaging to society at large, as it leaves the labour pool full of underutilized talent.
 

Second, according to Rose, our education system limits students’ potential by teaching all students a fixed curriculum at a fixed pace. This disadvantages those who need more time to effectively learn.

We assume that students who learn more quickly are “smarter” in general, and they’ll also excel at
retaining skills and using them to solve problems. However, research suggests this is false: When given
the freedom to progress through a curriculum at their own pace, almost any student can learn at a “gifted” level. Students benefit from spending more time on the ideas they struggle with and less time with those that come easily to them.

Our entire education system is based on the average learner, when there is no such thing. “So
schools fail at what they’re supposed to do - recognise and nurture talent,” says Rose 

This is what I experienced when going to school from 1948. It is also how I was encouraged to teach when at Wellington Teacher's College 1963-64.  Joan Paske, Maths Adviser, was soanit whole class teaching she with her supporters produced a Differentiated Framework, called Wellington Maths!

Refer back to my previous Blog and the next one "Charlotte Wilkinson's Thoughts"