U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Education
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-05-2011, 03:34 PM
 
15,760 posts, read 13,187,771 times
Reputation: 19646

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by DewDropInn View Post
And what is at stake nowadays? I still don't understand. Sorry. Prizes? Trips to far away places? Better lockers?
Stakes, as in potential gain, maybe I am using the word wrong?

I mean that with the nature of competition increasing, the rewards for winning are increased. Both tangible (prizes, scholarships, etc) and intangible (pride, networking, notoriety, etc).

Since all of the students at our school are "gifted" (really they are all top 10% not actually gifted) there are no school privileges for winning things like these. Hell, we barely have senior privileges but that would be a different thread.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-05-2011, 03:48 PM
 
32,538 posts, read 29,351,992 times
Reputation: 32238
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkb0714 View Post
Stakes, as in potential gain, maybe I am using the word wrong?

I mean that with the nature of competition increasing, the rewards for winning are increased. Both tangible (prizes, scholarships, etc) and intangible (pride, networking, notoriety, etc).
Got it. Thank you! So pretty much the same as 40 years ago without the trips to Disneyworld.

(Think I now also understand more of where you're coming from. Which is always a good thing.)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2011, 04:29 PM
 
530 posts, read 959,904 times
Reputation: 1134
Quote:
Originally Posted by syracusa View Post
Separating kids by ability so early on, before they are even exposed to the ENTIRE range of the elementary curriculum means killing that equality of opportunity in its infancy.
The talk about exposing all kids to the same material seems compelling. However, unfortunately exposing kids to something they are not ready to learn really doesn't do any good.

My two oldest children had the same second grade teacher. The oldest was in the lowest reading group and received basic second grade reading assignments and comprehension questions. My middle child was in the highest group. She brought home very interesting and complex reading material about all kinds of things--other cultures, science, etc. Her comprehension questions were also more involved, requiring her to be able to make inferences etc.

Do I wish my oldest had been exposed to the same reading material at the same age? No - her vocabulary and comprehension skills were not advanced enough at that age for her to understand such material. It would have gone right over her head and been a waste of time.

Even at the youngest age, kids come to school with different levels of vocabulary, comprehension, processing speed etc. I don't think our school eliminated any opportunities by recognizing this. On the contrary, their approach absolutely has worked. Both of my kids have improved, but my oldest has actually improved the most. However, this would not have happened if she had been in the "kingly" gifted groups. She would have gotten no where because she would not have had the proper foundation necessary to comprehend or benefit from advanced material.

This holds true now that my oldest is an "average" student as well. I want her to have an education that works for her even if that is not one where she is doing advanced math that other people may be able to do at the same age.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2011, 04:39 PM
 
4,044 posts, read 5,948,952 times
Reputation: 3819
Quote:
Originally Posted by ellar View Post
The talk about exposing all kids to the same material seems compelling. However, unfortunately exposing kids to something they are not ready to learn really doesn't do any good.

My two oldest children had the same second grade teacher. The oldest was in the lowest reading group and received basic second grade reading assignments and comprehension questions. My middle child was in the highest group. She brought home very interesting and complex reading material about all kinds of things--other cultures, science, etc. Her comprehension questions were also more involved, requiring her to be able to make inferences etc.

Do I wish my oldest had been exposed to the same reading material at the same age? No - her vocabulary and comprehension skills were not advanced enough at that age for her to understand such material. It would have gone right over her head and been a waste of time.

Even at the youngest age, kids come to school with different levels of vocabulary, comprehension, processing speed etc. I don't think our school eliminated any opportunities by recognizing this. On the contrary, their approach absolutely has worked. Both of my kids have improved, but my oldest has actually improved the most. However, this would not have happened if she had been in the "kingly" gifted groups. She would have gotten no where because she would not have had the proper foundation necessary to comprehend or benefit from advanced material.

This holds true now that my oldest is an "average" student as well. I want her to have an education that works for her even if that is not one where she is doing advanced math that other people may be able to do at the same age.
I find it interesting that absolutely all mothers who tout the benefits of tracking and describe how it helped their "struggling/lesser" child also...surprise, surprise... happen to have one other kid who is "gifted". For whatever reason, they want us to believe that having kids at "both ends of the spectrum" allows them more clairvoyance and objectivity than what everyone else exhibits.

I wonder what parents of "right below gifted" think; or those who don't have children at "both ends of the spectrum". Again, I am more interested in the regular child than those at the extremes.
Regular children (not struggling or slow) can certainly benefit from being challenged, even if the challenge feels difficult for them.

Your "struggling" daughter would not have been hurt if she had been exposed to SOME GT curriculum. If it would just fly over her head, oh well - be it. She tried. But for many officially non-GT children, that type of curriculum would be beneficial and would not simply "fly over their heads".

I know mine would strongly benefit from it, and chances are he will barely miss the GT cut-off point next year.

Tracking kids into GT and non-GT is simply polarizing and simplistic, though I agree it is awfully convenient from a funding perspective.
Reality is not black and white.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2011, 05:23 PM
 
11,614 posts, read 19,729,031 times
Reputation: 12046
Quote:
Originally Posted by syracusa View Post
Regular children (not struggling or slow) can certainly benefit from being challenged, even if the challenge feels difficult for them.
What is challenging for one child is downright impossible to another. That's why tracking helps. It helps each group be challenged. Challenge to one kid may look impossible to the next kid and bore a third one.

I fully support challenging material for all students.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2011, 05:24 PM
 
11,614 posts, read 19,729,031 times
Reputation: 12046
Quote:
Originally Posted by syracusa View Post
If it would just fly over her head, oh well - be it. She tried.
Why would you waste a child's time by presenting material that flys over her head?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2011, 05:45 PM
 
15,760 posts, read 13,187,771 times
Reputation: 19646
Quote:
Originally Posted by DewDropInn View Post
Got it. Thank you! So pretty much the same as 40 years ago without the trips to Disneyworld.

(Think I now also understand more of where you're coming from. Which is always a good thing.)
So you refuse to accept the fact that the level of competition itself is increasing?

Were you really studying graduate level concepts for high school level academic competitions 40 years ago?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2011, 07:28 PM
 
530 posts, read 959,904 times
Reputation: 1134
Quote:
Originally Posted by syracusa View Post
I find it interesting that absolutely all mothers who tout the benefits of tracking and describe how it helped their "struggling/lesser" child also...surprise, surprise... happen to have one other kid who is "gifted". For whatever reason, they want us to believe that having kids at "both ends of the spectrum" allows them more clairvoyance and objectivity than what everyone else exhibits.

I wonder what parents of "right below gifted" think; or those who don't have children at "both ends of the spectrum". Again, I am more interested in the regular child than those at the extremes.
Regular children (not struggling or slow) can certainly benefit from being challenged, even if the challenge feels difficult for them.
I NEVER said my older daughter was "lesser." That is just downright offensive. Her IQ is actually a little above average, and she is a "regular" kid. She just has had some academic challenges that made things more difficult for her, and there are many kids like her. She also has been challenged in school as I have said over and over again, and she has worked her butt off.

Maybe moms like me do have more perspective because we see a range of abilities at home just like teachers see a range in classroom. I also linked to an article about tracking and pointed out there are many studies on it. I am not basing my opinions just on my kids. In addition, most respected private schools track, and their academic records often speak for themselves. Anyway, I am done with this discussion!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2011, 08:26 PM
 
1,428 posts, read 2,773,600 times
Reputation: 1460
Quote:
Originally Posted by formercalifornian View Post
What the Sam Hill does Disney have to do with gifted education? Trips to theme parks have no place in education, period. Shame on the parents who came up with this plan.
Yes. Whereas it's obviously a violation of simple common sense to assert that "all children are gifted" (just as it would be equally problematic to assert that "all children are disabled"), I had a number of problems with the idea that 60% of the students are labeled as such -- and a major problem with money and time being wasted at a theme park. Seriously, they couldn't even take them to a science museum? Really?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2011, 08:29 PM
 
32,538 posts, read 29,351,992 times
Reputation: 32238
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkb0714 View Post
So you refuse to accept the fact that the level of competition itself is increasing?

Were you really studying graduate level concepts for high school level academic competitions 40 years ago?
1 No. I'm not refusing or accepting anything as I have not yet gathered all the facts necessary to have an informed opinion one way or the other.

2. Go back and read my posts and think about whether or not you need to re-word that question.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Education
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top