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.
I was in a thing in elementary school called GATE...gifted and talented eduction. It was for, I dunno, smart kids. I don't think I really learned anything in that class that pushed my limits. One thing I remember is us discussing political topics. Back when I was in elementary school, the whole Clinton/Kosovo thing was going on, and we were talking about that. Really, did anything come out of it? Not really. Would I have come out any different by not being in that class? No. Only thing it did was make me feel like I was better than everyone else that wasn't in that class.
1) Were you bored stiff? I doubt it
2) Did you drop out? Nope, but a lot of smart kids do.
3) Well, WERE you better than the kids not in your class? Yes, but only academically.
As a teacher in a district with a huge GATE and Magnet school program I have to say I am absolutley shocked at some of the replies to this thread. Our education system has become so watered down, (the dumming down of America), that most classes in regular ed rooms are so "dummed down" to allow integration of all levels of students. It seems that average intelligence children now have to be labeled "gifted" just to receive a grade level education.
I have 2 children who are labeled "gifted". Are they? Well, according to today's academic standards, yes. But, only because the curriculum is so watered down that any child of average intelligence whiz's through it
Maybe the problem lies with teachers not even able to form proper grammar now?
1) Were you bored stiff? I doubt it
2) Did you drop out? Nope, but a lot of smart kids do.
3) Well, WERE you better than the kids not in your class? Yes, but only academically.
We had GATE in my school district as well. Aside from going on field trips and having "mature discussion sessions' and some GATE members taking on higher levels of math, they weren't really doing much different from what the other kids were doing academically.
To my knowledge not one GATE student dropped out, but many of them did end up at community or state college. All of the GATE kids that I still keep in contact with and/or follow up with on other social networking sites or through friends all lead pretty average lives as adults. And these were the kids who were supposed to be the future leaders/scientists/inventors/Noble Prize winners, etc. Kind of funny how peoples lives change from when they are in the third grade until well into adulthood.
Trying to answer the initial question on the basis of individual programmatic experiences as parent, student, teacher, or administrator can only disprove absolutes - it cannot provide a meaningful response to the general question, because so many of the "programs" don't deserve that label, and, while perhaps better than nothing on an immediate basis, serve primarily to shut up squeaky wheel parents who've demanded such a thing while not actually meeting the needs of these students or their community.
Poor G/T programs do more to undermine the need for programs than pretty much anything else I can think of. On the basis of some of the programs I have seen, *I* would advocate elimination of such things.
Then again, I can say the same thing about math programs, English and drama programs, sports programs, and pretty much anything else you can come up with to compare between schools.
******
The next problem is that no G/T program suits all G/T students - and most folks running the programs don't seem to understand that, nor that their programs are better geared to particular kinds of strengths. So, if you find an alternative identification method, you let those kids in, and they flounder in your G/T program, it doesn't necessarily mean the kids weren't gifted. It doesn't necessarily mean that the program is flawed. It may mean that there is a mismatch between the kinds of giftedness the program serves and the kinds of giftedness that method identifies.
*******
A key question is "What is a public school supposed to do?" Without that, again, there is no answer to the initial question.
If I accept the common definition: A public school system is responsible for providing a free and appropriate education for all students (within a certain age bracket), then to me the answer is a resounding and obvious YES, the public schools really need gifted and talented programs.
(At least, they do so long as we don't fully tailor our educational approaches to meet the needs of each student. Get back to me the day that tries to happen, and I will rewrite my perspective on this part of the education system.)
I believe the question asked is probably not the important question to ask. I would, instead, ask the following question:
Do gifted and talented students have specific educational needs that are not addressed adequately without a specific program's being established to do so?
I would tell you that some gifted and talented students are in dire need of the support such a program could give them, and will be lost to themselves and society without such programs. I would tell you that it is a significant percentage of our brightest students.
And I would tell you that this has been known, on a national basis, since at least 1930 and the White House Conference on Health of Children, which included a report on that problem.
You are probably correct, jps_teacher. However, as so many posters have shown, a lot, if not most of these programs are quite poorly run; students are not identified well, it's a status thing to get into TAG, etc. As another teacher said, most kids could benefit from some of the elements of these TAG programs, e.g. individualized instruction, hands-on learning, etc.
I don't have the answers. I don't think the right answer is to dump the programs entirely, but I think they need a lot of work.
You are probably correct, jps_teacher. However, as so many posters have shown, a lot, if not most of these programs are quite poorly run; students are not identified well, it's a status thing to get into TAG, etc. As another teacher said, most kids could benefit from some of the elements of these TAG programs, e.g. individualized instruction, hands-on learning, etc.
I don't have the answers. I don't think the right answer is to dump the programs entirely, but I think they need a lot of work.
"most kids could benefit from some of the elements of these SPED programs, e.g. individualized instruction, hands-on learning, etc."
My statement is as true as yours, but has nothing to do with getting rid of programs or keeping them - and a lot to do with more general education issues.
Understand that your closing comment that "they need a lot of work" is mine - I would phrase it as a gross understatement.
One of the biggest problems in getting them the overhaul they need is the neverending argument about the need. That understandably leads to fear by supporters that any close examination, upon its exposing the flaws in whatever program exists, will lead to killing the program rather than fixing/improving/building the program or just replacing it with a better one.
*******
A book was written that spelled out items that examined what a classroom of just gifted kids would need, and it broke it down into two types of needs:
1) Things that would be useful in all classrooms, but of particular utility in a classroom for the gifted;
2) Things that would be essential for classrooms of the gifted, which would have no great utility in a regular classroom.
It's not perfect, by any means. But then gain, it was written ~90 years ago!
Originally Posted by jps-teacher;6702232 "most kids could benefit from some of the elements of these [B
SPED[/b] programs, e.g. individualized instruction, hands-on learning, etc." My statement is as true as yours, but has nothing to do with getting rid of programs or keeping them - and a lot to do with more general education issues.
Understand that your closing comment that "they need a lot of work" is mine - I would phrase it as a gross understatement.
One of the biggest problems in getting them the overhaul they need is the neverending argument about the need. That understandably leads to fear by supporters that any close examination, upon its exposing the flaws in whatever program exists, will lead to killing the program rather than fixing/improving/building the program or just replacing it with a better one.
*******
A book was written that spelled out items that examined what a classroom of just gifted kids would need, and it broke it down into two types of needs:
1) Things that would be useful in all classrooms, but of particular utility in a classroom for the gifted;
2) Things that would be essential for classrooms of the gifted, which would have no great utility in a regular classroom.
It's not perfect, by any means. But then gain, it was written ~90 years ago!
Well, I hardly meant to argue with you. My point (and the point of the person I was paraphrasing, I think) is that such programming should not be limited to the TAG students. I don't know if you've read all the posts, but there have been a number waxing rhapsodic over the TAG programs they and /or their kids have been in, involving small group, hands on, individual interests, etc. That is perhaps the ideal for all students, not just the actual 2% who are genuinely gifted.
Last edited by Katarina Witt; 12-25-2008 at 09:18 AM..
jps_teacher: sorry for messing up your post when I quoted it; no matter how much I tried, I couldn't get my computer to do what I wanted, which was to bold the first sentence. Sometimes computers just won't do what they are supposed to do.
We had GATE in my school district as well. Aside from going on field trips and having "mature discussion sessions' and some GATE members taking on higher levels of math, they weren't really doing much different from what the other kids were doing academically.
To my knowledge not one GATE student dropped out, but many of them did end up at community or state college. All of the GATE kids that I still keep in contact with and/or follow up with on other social networking sites or through friends all lead pretty average lives as adults. And these were the kids who were supposed to be the future leaders/scientists/inventors/Noble Prize winners, etc. Kind of funny how peoples lives change from when they are in the third grade until well into adulthood.
Yes, you are right. I keep thinking about the number of smarter kids who do drop out if they are not challenged at all. At the very least, they could be advanced to a higher grade, in subjects where they excel. I think someone earlier mentioned that many schools don't have the resources for special classes, so this could be an alternative. Granted, many kids want to stay with their classmates, so it should be the student's choice.
I also agree with other poster/s that many schools don't have the resources to properly gauge a given student's suitability for advanced classes or early advancement. BTW, I remember a guy I talked to once, who said he qualified for a gifted class. He was very happy to have been able to move up to a level where he wouldn't be bored out of his gourd. I have to substitute my words for his, since my memory of the exchange has clouded over time.
I have a different interpretation of K-Luv's post, based on my own experiences and those of my kids. The "future Nobel Prize winners" who did IB/AP, CU Succeed, etc, often went to rather mundane colleges and did not accomplish all that the teachers (at least some of them) in the high schools thought they would. This effect was even more prominent in the ele/middle schools. Some of those kids burned out in high school.
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.
