Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Also, to add, I found in my search for gifted schools in CO, a link to the Denver metro area gifted resources; it lists schools, local groups/organizations, etc. http://www.denver.us.mensa.org/gifted.php Hope it's helpful.
BTW, people do not realize that putting a gifted child in a normal developmental continuum classroom, is tantamount to putting a special needs child who cannot learn, in the same environment. In fact, gifted is now considered 'special needs', in order to both highlight itself as a focus worthy of attention, and to receive funding. It's not funny, and parents are not clueless or subjectively thinking just their child is special....Research shoes that parents of gifted children are usually the first to suggest that their child is gifted; and, they are usually correct in this belief. This is according to the specialists, teachers, staff, etc. It is cruel to think that a child can simply suck it up and do extra worksheets. And gifted does not mean a child aces every subject or test every time. It's very sad when districts will not consider focused programs, b/c they are concerned about 'elitism'. Are children who are not failing, and don't come from a broken or economically poor home, not to thrive or be able to reach their full potential, b/c another child may not be able to do the same? [Not that someone from a poor home could not be gifted, to the contrary...but I mention this b/c I have seen fights against charter schools in some states, and against specific types such as language immersion, on the grounds that they are elitist and will take the high performing kids out of the city's district, and these kids are usually of the higher socio economic group, according to the arguments. Make no mistake, this is def. more about public interest lobbying and school districts vying for money per student.]
This is dangerous territory we've entered into nationally. Weeding out excellence and individual exceptionalism is NOT in our national interest. The proliferation of IB programs at elementary and secondary levels, seems to be turning the tide, fortunately. No child left behind was starting to become 'all children left behind'; trust me.
Last edited by lrmsd; 04-08-2012 at 10:05 PM..
Reason: typo
Interesting. So aren't we talking about kids with high IQs, or is there another reason to refer to them as gifted? Just curious.
As far as charter schools, I have mixed emotions about them. When we need a lot more money to be spent in the public classrooms, and when charters do not have to meet the same requirements (in some states) as public schools, I can see them doing more harm than good. I would rather have more money put into the public schools and have them develop extra programs for those in the gifted category - that way all parents can pool their support and resources toward the best outcome for all children. But that's just me. In a climate where certain circles are attempting to defund and demonize education and educators, I get very leery of anything that has the capacity to reduce the quality of our public schools.
And gifted does not mean a child aces every subject or test every time.
Sorry to interject, but what exactly does "gifted" mean and why exactly do such children require "special needs" treatment? The first time they gave me one of those standardized 7th grade IQ tests, I apparently scored higher than anyone in the (large urban public) school the previous three years. And yet I did not and do not feel I'd been somehow abused by being in a "normal" elementary class environment, with normal socialization, with "normal" kids, with whom I learned to fit right in. It was a good, solid, "normal" public educational foundation without any bells and whistles designed to make my (single) parent feel good about himself, which allowed me to to develop the academic skills to finish top 1% in high school and (public) university and near the top in a competitive professional school program. No fancy elementary "gifted" program necessary.
The idea that "gifted" children (however that term is being used) are somehow being discriminated against by not having their own separate learning zone away from riff-raffy "normal" children strikes me as absurd in the extreme. If the elementary schools in my (high-achieving) Colorado district tried to pull my two kids out of their "normal" classes and stick them into a "gifted-only" program like some sort of germ free zone, the Superintendent would be getting a call from me as an irritated parent. Part of this perspective is because I realize that my ability to be effective as a professional adult has as much to do with the social skills I learned in a "normal" elementary as it has to do with whatever mental firepower I may (or may not) enjoy. As a parent, I'm not looking for the prestige of having a "gifted" child I can brag about to other parents (although the temptation is always there) - I'm trying to focus on the important stuff like whether my kids are developing the ability to overcome challenges, deal with adversity and the inevitable difficult kids/adults, and whether their natural creativity/curiosity is being overly stiffled by the modern inevitability of teaching to standardized tests. Should I be concerned my kids who score in the 97th-99th percentile in math and reading are going to be harmed by not being in a "gifted-only" program? Apparently, modern "gifted" educational theory says yes, I should be. And yet, what little common sense my high-iq-test-score mind allows tells me my kids are actually better off in a "normal" classroom setting during elementary school. There will be plenty of time for them to obsess over the academic achievement wars when they're 15-25.
Again, sorry to interject, but I obviously don't grasp the concept that high intelligence kids are being abused by not segregating them away from a "normal" environment. I'm not aware of any negative impact by my own experience of "normality," other than perhaps an unfortunate tendency to pontificate on public blog sites. Carry on.
Should I be concerned my kids who score in the 97th-99th percentile in math and reading are going to be harmed by not being in a "gifted-only" program?
As long as you and they feel they are being challenged and are not bored at school, you shouldn't. A lot of high-achieving kids are not challenged and often become bored with repetitive instruction (look at any math program, for example - it's most likely a "spiral" curriculum, where certain skills are learned and practiced over and over again, presumably, in a progressively complex context).
Note I didn't say "gifted", only high-achieving. I personally don't care how school labels my kid, as long as his/her needs are met. This could be done by placing him in a "gifted-only" classroom (not available in BVSD), in a pull-out gifted program (available at most BVSD elementaries, as far as I know), where kids spend part of their school day learning more advanced concepts, or by assigning him more challenging work in a "normal" classroom.
I personally don't care how school labels my kid, as long as his/her needs are met.
As a "modern" parent, I understand and share this concern to a degree. As a budding curmudgeon, however, bewildered by a culture of myopic self-indulgence and coddled adolescence extending to age 30 and beyond, I am making an effort to ask not what my kid's school can do to fit my kid but rather what my kid can do to fit into his school. I read a newspaper article a few years ago by one of my high-school math teachers who was "forced" to complete her kid's college applications for them because they were "too hard and confusing" for the kid. Are you effing kidding me? If the kid can't figure out a college application, might it be they don't belong in college?!? I'm hearing about more and more examples of parents of twenty-something recent college grads who are literally storming into their child's place of employment to dispute them not getting a promotion or whatever else their supposedly "gifted" kid felt entitled to that day. Huh?
Apparently, this "parents taking responsibility for their gifted kid's achievement" extends well beyond what I recall being normal back in my curmudgeondly day, back when we either sucked it up, studied, and performed or suffered the consequence. I don't recall being "bored" as an acceptable option to explain away why I underperformed. "Boredom" was not an acceptable option. Performing to the absolute best of my ability was the only tolerated option. If I failed to do so, the blame fell on me, not the school. Nobody was going to write my college entrance application for me or argue with my boss for a job promotion. I'm a pretty progressive guy, but I have to admit some of these modern trends are disturbing, me having apparently transformed into such a curmudgeon.
Sigh. Sorry to be so out of touch, behind the times, whatever. My poor kids have to deal with a parent who insists they not be bored, that they do their best on every assignment and ever test, that they figure out how to get along with the difficult, more popular, less intelligent kids as best they can. They'll never be placed in a "gifted-only" charter school. They'll write their own college applications. They'll earn their own promotions. They'll probably have to hunt down their own employment, and figure out a way to hold onto the job. I will cheer for them at each and every step. But I will not do it for them. That would be cruel.
They'll never be placed in a "gifted-only" charter school. They'll write their own college applications. They'll earn their own promotions. They'll probably have to hunt down their own employment, and figure out a way to hold onto the job. I will cheer for them at each and every step. But I will not do it for them. That would be cruel.
I think you extrapolate too much. Being in a gifted-only classroom doesn't equal being unfit for "real life". I support your views regarding self-reliance of young adults, but I just don't see how these two subjects are so directly related.
I was born and raised in one of the former USSR republics (not Russia), and my school experience was completely different from what you may have experienced here. I recall that when our class had a math test, for example, there were two versions of tests. Half the kids got one version, and half - another. This was done to prevent cheating. (Cheating was very common and viewed as a "good thing to do" among students in post-Soviet schools, probably, as a way of defying authority). Then teacher would give me and some other kids our own version, so that other kids wouldn't copy our work.
I don't remember if these "special" versions were harder, or just different, but I distinctly remember I could do my version, and both of the "regular" versions during one class period, then let my friends copy whatever version they needed. Probably, was not the best thing to do morally (although acceptable and even honorable in our own "moral code" then), but somehow gave me the sense of empowerment.
Anyway, I think we are getting way off-topic .
Wow this thread REALLY got off topic since I originally posted it!
I just wanted to update to say that my kids are going to High Peaks - a charter school. As mentioned, it is not a dedicated gifted school, but is known to be a high performing, academically focused school. I am hopeful that it will meet their needs and be a sufficiently challenging environment. They will also be able to be involved in the TAG program for additional enrichment. The school sounds great, both from an academic, as well as a social perspective, so we are very hopeful about how it will turn out... We'll see.
Thanks all.
I support your views regarding self-reliance of young adults, but I just don't see how these two subjects are so directly related.
The relationship of the two subjects, from my perspective, is that by segregating "gifted" students from the "regular" students, the social/life skills of the "gifted" students may not develop as fully as had they been exposed to the challenge of dealing with kids up and down the intelligence spectrum. It's one thing having kids self-segregate into different tracks within the same school, it's another to segregate kids into entirely separate schools in which they never interact with "other."
As a personal example, while I tested into every AP class available, finished Top 1% of my high-school class, have every academic award one could want from prestigious national university hanging on my office wall, all that "gifted" mumbo jumbo has precious little to do with my professional survival, nearly all of which involves my ability to connect with people, most of whom are not similarly "gifted" and, frankly, can at times be a bit suspicious of high-achievers. I trace these social skills back to my 4th - 10th grade years in schools with a diverse student population. Had I been sent off to some school segregated into 150+ IQ students only, I'm not so sure that would have been in my best interest. I'm not so sure I'd be quite as self-reliant and confident in dealing with a wide variety of people. THAT is how the two subjects are, to me, directly related.
To the OP, great to hear you found a school you feel will be positive for your kids. My (brief) review of the posts in this thread seem to show posters generally kept the discussion related to the gifted-talented educational theory/debate, though we did admittedly veer away from your specific question as to which particular school your specific children should attend.
Westgate, although for gifted kids, is for gifted kids who also have other issues such as ADHD.
That's not entirely accurate. Westgate is a school for gifted learners that provides an education commensurate with their unique needs and abilities. Most gifted programming is designed primarily around the needs of one type of gifted learner.
This does mean that Westgate is very good at serving twice-exceptional kids, and my kid is one of them, but it's good for any smart kid who thrives in a more creative learning environment that focuses on emotional & social needs as well as academics. Stargate & Hulstrom are probably as good or better for kids, and families, who thrive in a more traditional classroom environment. Westgate is more entrepreneurial & out of the box.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
.
Update
