Do public schools really NEED gifted and talented programs? (PhD, districts, accepted)
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'm going to have to agree with Charles Wallace here. Accelerate them. While you are correct that more and faster are different things, a, truely, gifted child can do more on their own. This is what sets my dd apart from other kids. Her ability to go where other students don't. She doesn't need a teacher to do that for her. She can do it herself and does. We accelerate her when she outstrips her own ability to go deeper and gets bored and start the process over again. She's now 1.5 grade levels ahead of the kids she started kindergarten with (one full grade skip plus subject specific skips).
You keep using your child as an example. Sorry but the odds that your child is truly gifted are slim. Good grades and maturity are not signs of gifted intelligence they are equally worth while traits but they are not the same thing. For an example, my own child has an above average yet not gifted level of intelligence. She has straight As, all honors and AP classes, and has also skipped 7th grade. She is not gifted she is incredibly motivated and very smart. There is a difference.
I really don't see her needing special teaching. What she really needs is the opportunity to learn on her own and that comes more at home than at school.
What confounds me about my "gifted" kids in my classes is they don't do this on their own. They'll complain they're bored but not take the initiative to do something more or come to me with a suggestion to do something different. I had one student last year who would. He, rarely, did what the class did and he learned a lot more than they did. The rest just want to whine. I really have to question just how smart you are if you can't accomodate yourself.
I was never considered bright in school. In fact, they thought there was something wrong with me. Yet, in spite of being channeled into lower classes and never having anyone challenge me, I learned a lot. Probably not what the teacher was testing (looking at my grades) but my scores on standardized tests indicated a level of learning beyond my peers in spite of my grades. My performance in college did the same. It never dawned on me in high school to whine because someone wasn't challenging me. I don't think it would have made much difference if they had.[/quote]
You keep using your child as an example aside from the anecdotal nature of this its still highly unlikely that your child is truly gifted. Good grades and maturity are not signs of gifted intelligence. They are equally worth while traits but they are not the same thing. For an example, my own child has an above average yet not gifted level of intelligence. She has straight As, all honors and AP classes, and has also skipped 7th grade. She is not truly a G/t candidate but she is incredibly motivated and very smart. There is a difference.
Maybe this is an issue of definitions since my understanding of G/T varies considerably from yours.
You keep using your child as an example. Sorry but the odds that your child is truly gifted are slim. Good grades and maturity are not signs of gifted intelligence they are equally worth while traits but they are not the same thing. For an example, my own child has an above average yet not gifted level of intelligence. She has straight As, all honors and AP classes, and has also skipped 7th grade. She is not gifted she is incredibly motivated and very smart. There is a difference.
I really don't see her needing special teaching. What she really needs is the opportunity to learn on her own and that comes more at home than at school.
What confounds me about my "gifted" kids in my classes is they don't do this on their own. They'll complain they're bored but not take the initiative to do something more or come to me with a suggestion to do something different. I had one student last year who would. He, rarely, did what the class did and he learned a lot more than they did. The rest just want to whine. I really have to question just how smart you are if you can't accomodate yourself.
I was never considered bright in school. In fact, they thought there was something wrong with me. Yet, in spite of being channeled into lower classes and never having anyone challenge me, I learned a lot. Probably not what the teacher was testing (looking at my grades) but my scores on standardized tests indicated a level of learning beyond my peers in spite of my grades. My performance in college did the same. It never dawned on me in high school to whine because someone wasn't challenging me. I don't think it would have made much difference if they had.
You keep using your child as an example aside from the anecdotal nature of this its still highly unlikely that your child is truly gifted. Good grades and maturity are not signs of gifted intelligence. They are equally worth while traits but they are not the same thing. For an example, my own child has an above average yet not gifted level of intelligence. She has straight As, all honors and AP classes, and has also skipped 7th grade. She is not truly a G/t candidate but she is incredibly motivated and very smart. There is a difference.
Maybe this is an issue of definitions since my understanding of G/T varies considerably from yours.[/quote]
Actually, my daughter is gifted. It's not an issue of faster tracking but an ability to reason and put things together in ways that are well beyond her years. The faster tracking just helps alleviate boredom for her when she's surpassed what is being taught in the subject she's in.
Giftedness just doesn't mean she needs special classes. She's quite capable of keeping herself challenged if the teacher doesn't, to a point. When we pass that point, we move her up to the next grade level. Of course this means I'll have a 12 year old taking high school classes next year . (She's still mad at us for not letting her go this year but graduating at 16 is bad enough.)
The funny thing is she's really not a motivated learner. She just hates being bored. We'd probably do more harm than good putting her in classes where the teacher did the challenging for her. She's learned how to challenge herself.
She's not the only gifted person I know. It runs in my family and I can say that none of them needed a special gifted program. All did fine in spite of not having one if they didn't have one and the ones that did didn't fare any better out of high school. I don't really see the advantage/harm. They seem to stay smart even if they have to take regular ed classes. They just blossom in college.
IMO, G&T programs are nice. Parents want them and want their kids in them. Teachers like them if they don't result in over stuffing our classes with the kids who don't make the program .
Seriously, I'd like to see some stats on what happens to formerly gifted kids. There don't seem to be nearly the gifted adults as there are gifted kids.
Sorry but the odds that your child is truly gifted are slim.
Did anyone ever define Talented and Gifted?
What exactly does that mean?
Letting the parents define it is not in the best interest of anyone, especially since all parents consider their students to be TAG material.
What is a "C" anyway?
What is so wrong with a "C?"
"C" is just average. To me, that means that if I'm walking down the street and say, "Hey, tell me about Iraq" a "C" student could find Iraq on a map and tell me something of its government and social structure.
A "B" student could tell me Kuwait was province of Iraq and Kuwait became an independent country when Churchill farted while drawing a map of Iraq, and tell me about the Selucid Dynasties and Roman occupation.
An "A" student could tell me of the evolution of Shumer, Akkad, Babylonia, Assyria, Medo-Persia and the Macedonia Empires and how they affected Iraq.
A TAG student should be able to compose Shumerian psalms using pictographs, while reciting the Enuma elish... in Akkadian and playing an original Arabic musical composition on an "oud" using the Phrygian Scale.
Letting the parents define it is not in the best interest of anyone, especially since all parents consider their students to be TAG material.
What is a "C" anyway?
What is so wrong with a "C?"
"C" is just average. To me, that means that if I'm walking down the street and say, "Hey, tell me about Iraq" a "C" student could find Iraq on a map and tell me something of its government and social structure.
A "B" student could tell me Kuwait was province of Iraq and Kuwait became an independent country when Churchill farted while drawing a map of Iraq, and tell me about the Selucid Dynasties and Roman occupation.
An "A" student could tell me of the evolution of Shumer, Akkad, Babylonia, Assyria, Medo-Persia and the Macedonia Empires and how they affected Iraq.
A TAG student should be able to compose Shumerian psalms using pictographs, while reciting the Enuma elish... in Akkadian and playing an original Arabic musical composition on an "oud" using the Phrygian Scale.
Uhm, why?
Sorry but there are many, many gifted students who excel in one particular area, in fact that is true for the majority. So just because someone is not gifted in the area of geography or history does not mean they are not gifted. I had a gifted student in my school who was able to design a new aquarium design for maintaining jellies but likely could not show you where Iraq is. That does not mean he is not gifted.
Second, while I am a science teacher I can tell you that the vast majority of high schools in my state do not have the time in their SINGLE year of world history to cover that information.
Oh and I gave our states definition of G/T in an earlier post.
A "B" student could tell me Kuwait was province of Iraq and Kuwait became an independent country when Churchill farted while drawing a map of Iraq, and tell me about the Selucid Dynasties and Roman occupation.
I have to admit, I'm not familiar with the "farting Churchill" theory of Kuwaiti state formation.
I teach at a small PUBLIC school for gifted children and our per students costs are completely inline (and frequently less) than those at general ed schools. One of the reasons is we use the money that would be spent on SpEd issues for other opportunities.
Second, you seem to think that gifted kids should should receive FASTER education as opposed to MORE. They are not the same thing and that is not meeting the needs of gifted children. For example there are entire classes in my school that you would not find at a regular high school (such as Senior Research) in addition to the college level courses. SpEd kids frequently get taught in unique methods and not just "slower" than their counterparts in gen ed so why shouldn't the G/T get unique opportunities as well? Especially since if we do it in a school environment there is no more expense AND it removes the elitist issue.
Perhaps you are misreading the word "accelerate."
"Acceleration" is the equivalent of what used to be called "grade-skipping." The subject is not accelerated; the child's rate of learning is. For example, if you have a child reading and thinking at the 9th grade level, s/he would, statistically speaking, be well-served to be placed in language classes at that level even if she were not of 9th grade age. Does this clarify the issue?
For what it's worth, gifted children also do well when the subject matter is compacted -- that is, presented at a higher rate of speed and in greater depth. Check out Hoagies.org for "curriculum compacting" and "acceleration," and they'll have a great deal of useful information to help you.
I'm not certain what your purpose is in telling me, "SpEd kids frequently get taught in unique methods and not just "slower" than their counterparts in gen ed so why shouldn't the G/T get unique opportunities as well?" This is essentially my point.
Letting the parents define it is not in the best interest of anyone, especially since all parents consider their students to be TAG material.
What is a "C" anyway?
What is so wrong with a "C?"
"C" is just average. To me, that means that if I'm walking down the street and say, "Hey, tell me about Iraq" a "C" student could find Iraq on a map and tell me something of its government and social structure.
A "B" student could tell me Kuwait was province of Iraq and Kuwait became an independent country when Churchill farted while drawing a map of Iraq, and tell me about the Selucid Dynasties and Roman occupation.
An "A" student could tell me of the evolution of Shumer, Akkad, Babylonia, Assyria, Medo-Persia and the Macedonia Empires and how they affected Iraq.
A TAG student should be able to compose Shumerian psalms using pictographs, while reciting the Enuma elish... in Akkadian and playing an original Arabic musical composition on an "oud" using the Phrygian Scale.
Nothing is wrong with C. Most people are C's. We've just got this crazy idea that everyone has to be an A.
I remember a plaque my dean had in his office when I was in engineering school. It said:
Be nice to your A students because someday they will return as a professor.
Be nice to your B students because someday they will design a new building for your campus.
Be nice to your C students because they will build it for you.
I have no idea why being average is looked down upon. By the very definition of average, most of us are, average. Yet we all seem to think we're not.
Nothing is wrong with C. Most people are C's. We've just got this crazy idea that everyone has to be an A.
I remember a plaque my dean had in his office when I was in engineering school. It said:
Be nice to your A students because someday they will return as a professor.
Be nice to your B students because someday they will design a new building for your campus.
Be nice to your C students because they will build it for you.
I have no idea why being average is looked down upon. By the very definition of average, most of us are, average. Yet we all seem to think we're not.
That may have been the case when you were in engineering school (how long ago was that?) but a C isn't acceptable any more, at least not here. In our middle schools the G&T classes are for the average to above average students and the regular classes are remedial, at best. A C student in the average classes is either lazy or dumb as a box of rocks. Heck, the reading requirement for the G&T class was one book every 6 weeks...less in the regular classes. There wasn't one major writing assignment for my middle school students...both in G&T. How much lower do you think the standards are for the 'average' students and how little work do you think an 'average' C student is doing?
Colleges are having to teach their freshmen the basics because they are coming out of high school with huge holes in their knowledge base. DD's high school had to develop a special language arts course that could be named Everything You DIDN'T Learn in Middle School LA. They needed the course because the students were coming in not capable of high school level work, much less the college level work they will be doing before they graduate.
"Acceleration" is the equivalent of what used to be called "grade-skipping." The subject is not accelerated; the child's rate of learning is. For example, if you have a child reading and thinking at the 9th grade level, s/he would, statistically speaking, be well-served to be placed in language classes at that level even if she were not of 9th grade age. Does this clarify the issue?
For what it's worth, gifted children also do well when the subject matter is compacted -- that is, presented at a higher rate of speed and in greater depth. Check out Hoagies.org for "curriculum compacting" and "acceleration," and they'll have a great deal of useful information to help you.
I'm not certain what your purpose is in telling me, "SpEd kids frequently get taught in unique methods and not just "slower" than their counterparts in gen ed so why shouldn't the G/T get unique opportunities as well?" This is essentially my point.
You're preaching to the choir here about methodology as I teach at a school exclusively for gifted and high achieving students. And while I thank you for the thought behind the website I do not need it.
My point remains that MANY gifted students are not served best by either just grade skipping or condensing of the curriculum. Exposure to curricula outside those normally found in a public school, research opportunities, working with professionals in their fields, etc are all methods for enriching the education for the gifted. I know they work as we use them in my district everyday. It is also one of the benefits of having dedicated G/T schools as opposed to small ones in individual schools
That may have been the case when you were in engineering school (how long ago was that?) but a C isn't acceptable any more, at least not here. In our middle schools the G&T classes are for the average to above average students and the regular classes are remedial, at best. A C student in the average classes is either lazy or dumb as a box of rocks. Heck, the reading requirement for the G&T class was one book every 6 weeks...less in the regular classes. There wasn't one major writing assignment for my middle school students...both in G&T. How much lower do you think the standards are for the 'average' students and how little work do you think an 'average' C student is doing?
Colleges are having to teach their freshmen the basics because they are coming out of high school with huge holes in their knowledge base. DD's high school had to develop a special language arts course that could be named Everything You DIDN'T Learn in Middle School LA. They needed the course because the students were coming in not capable of high school level work, much less the college level work they will be doing before they graduate.
No, a C student is not going to cut it anymore.
True, C's were earned back then. Now they're handed out like candy. I was shocked at how easy A's have become when I went back to school for my teaching degree. It took so little to get them that I can see viewing a C as unacceptable. It shouldn't be though. We need to get back to the days when a C was a respectable grade and the only way to do that is to make a C mean something again. When A's are easy, C's are nogthing but it shouldn't be that way.
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.
. (She's still mad at us for not letting her go this year but graduating at 16 is bad enough.)