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.
'm sure I'll get flamed for this post but: Chemteacher, your post just reiterates that fact that in urban school districts such as Wake County, the focus and research remains on the the lowest performing students and basically ignores the higher performing students as a result of NCLB. It's almost as if the system thinks that high performing children are going to either teach themselves or their parents are going to do it for them. In my 8 years within the wcpss, I see higher achieving students actually getting less and less quality education and "good" teachers. There's more focus on getting the 2nd grade kid not reading at grade level to meet the goal than the 2nd grade kid reading ABOVE grade level. Why the differentiation?
At best, the teacher throws a third grade book at them and tells the parents the kid is meeting grade level objectives without furthering the students educational needs. That IS basically closing the achievmemt gap, right? Accelerating the slow learner with one on one teaching and stagnating the fastest learners. The brightest kids get ignored by the system in lieu of making sure the lowest achievers pass the tests.
After reading these posts, here is my take on the education system. I think schools SHOULD focus on the kids who struggle academically. If your kid is truly gifted (at a reading level a couple grade levels above their current one for example), they will be o.k. regardless of what is going on in their class. I don't consider their growth being hindered if the teacher spends time trying to bring the other kids up to speed. As long as they have college prep and AP classes available to take when they get to High School, they haven't missed out on any opportunities and they have a bright future ahead of them. Personally, I believe my education truly began with college anyway. Everything else before was just preparatory and I'm glad I was able to just be a kid and not put on some fast track for no apparent reason.
It makes no sense for publicly funded schools to cater to kids who are ahead of the curve. As mentioned, AG programs exist for them in addition to magnet schools. If this is not enough, they should learn to seek further knowledge on their own. The desire to seek knowledge will serve a student far greater in their lifetime than anything that can be taught in a classroom.
The kid I want the educational system to devote their resources to is the one who isn't reading at their current reading level and who doesn't have parents who care whether he is or isn't. It benefits our future society much more to make sure every kid from every socio-economic background is given a chance to succeed as opposed to ensuring the "gifted" kids don't get bored.
I myself went through my primary education as an "academically gifted" student who scored in the highest percentiles on the annual tests. Looking back now as an older and wiser person, I resent the fact that myself and others were treated as if we were better than other students based on this criteria. There are a lot of young students with the potential but aren't given the proper encouragement. Nobody should give up on a kid and set them on the path to failure at an early age just because they may struggle a little. No Child Left Behind is a concept that is necessary future success of this country.
Maybe a silly question, but whatever happened to AG (academically gifted) programs? I remember when I was in school (the year after the dinos disappeared ) we had the AG program we went through if we were determined to be "gifted" and let me tell you...it -really- helped to relieve the boredom a kid can feel if they are performing above their grade-level. Granted, it was only 2 days a week, but still...the classes we had were -awesome-.
I can only speak for my district in upstate NY (hope you don't start disregarding my opinion now that I have revealed my location: I will jump on the eduction bankwagon regardless of state! ):
I have 4 children, the oldest being 28 and an I.Q. in the 150 range (was tested as a child).....she's now a NICU NP. When she was in school, they did what was referred to as tracking when the same level kids were repeatedly put in the same class each year and the higher level was in turn, placed in a program called extended learning. Well, the powers that be apparently got tired of all the parents clamoring that their kid should be in the faster classes so they did away with the gifted program entirely. Enter mainstreaming.
Now our youngest is 15, entering 9th grade and there is absolutely no extended learning or gifted programs whatsoever. When I questioned the super., who I've known forever, he stated, "How do you tell parents their child is not good enough to be enrolled in gifted programs?" so in essence, they did away with the programs due to parental pressure and I'm sure a lot also had to do with the NCLB demands. He is in honors math and science but even at times, that seems watered down.
So now we have homogenized programs that my son sits through and with an IQ close to his sisters, I can only imagine the atrophy his brain is going through.
We have taken it upon ourselves to enrich and stimulate his brain power in others ways and hope we never close the door to him learning and questioning and wondering that, IMO, the public school's lack of has been taken to a new art form.
I agree that a higher level learner will do well regardless of school situation but when an injustice to them in the long run that they are not challenged just as much as the students who need a little extra boost!
With apologies to any one with children at the other end of the spectrum as we all love our children and only want the best for them, what ever their needs. But when I have a son who comes home regaling us with stories of sitting in classrooms through lessons that are repeating the same concept over and over and over that he understood before it was presented, it is hard not to feel a tad bitter.
On a personal note, light years ago, when I was a parochial student, the nuns took a group of us after school to the convent and we read classics and had deep discussions about them 2-3 times a week. It was never conveyed to us we were "gifted" but in retrospect, that what it was. And it was awesome.
Last edited by Fallingwater79; 08-04-2007 at 08:16 AM..
It makes no sense for publicly funded schools to cater to kids who are ahead of the curve. As mentioned, AG programs exist for them in addition to magnet schools. If this is not enough, they should learn to seek further knowledge on their own. The desire to seek knowledge will serve a student far greater in their lifetime than anything that can be taught in a classroom.
The kid I want the educational system to devote their resources to is the one who isn't reading at their current reading level and who doesn't have parents who care whether he is or isn't. It benefits our future society much more to make sure every kid from every socio-economic background is given a chance to succeed as opposed to ensuring the "gifted" kids don't get bored.
I myself went through my primary education as an "academically gifted" student who scored in the highest percentiles on the annual tests. Looking back now as an older and wiser person, I resent the fact that myself and others were treated as if we were better than other students based on this criteria. There are a lot of young students with the potential but aren't given the proper encouragement. Nobody should give up on a kid and set them on the path to failure at an early age just because they may struggle a little. No Child Left Behind is a concept that is necessary future success of this country.
I politely disagree. That curve you refer to has now been totally disbanded and the other extreme has taken over. Believing that stalling the learning process for the quicker learners so the slower learners don't fall behind is pure lunacy. It is not the fault of a child if (s)he learns at a different level and to prejudice against it, at either level, in the school setting is an insult. As for NCLB, the drawing board concept was commendable. The institution of it is has dwindled down to schools battling to "teach to the test" the best they can so the scores look goodl and the district is happy and eveyone wants their child to go to that school so enrollment soars and life is good.
But it's not. Our kids will be the best test takers in the world but that alone will not insure a successful future will it.
Last edited by Fallingwater79; 08-04-2007 at 08:57 AM..
Greeny I understand your point and I also want children of all ability levels to excell in school! I just don't want one group catered to over the other on EITHER end of the spectrum. But it also doesn't make any sense to me to ignore the brightest children in your system just because they are bright. The AG programs barely scratch the surface (45 minutes a week) and not everyone has the benefit of an AG basics magnet (we've been applying for 8 years and have never been accepted to ANY magnet).
I also don't blame individual teachers, but I see this downward curve for bright students as a result of NCLB and the response is almost always the same as yours: bright students will do well anyway, so don't worry about them. When it's your kid who sits there in and day out doing the same math work for weeks at time it gets frustrating and you wonder why your kid basically gets ignored at school. It's also that attitude that has so many parents leaving the school system for private, charter and homeschools which can't be good for the schools as a whole.
Greeny I understand your point and I also want children of all ability levels to excel in school! I just don't want one group catered to over the other on EITHER end of the spectrum. But it also doesn't make any sense to me to ignore the brightest children in your system just because they are bright. The AG programs barely scratch the surface (45 minutes a week) and not everyone has the benefit of an AG basics magnet (we've been applying for 8 years and have never been accepted to ANY magnet).
I also don't blame individual teachers, but I see this downward curve for bright students as a result of NCLB and the response is almost always the same as yours: bright students will do well anyway, so don't worry about them. When it's your kid who sits there in and day out doing the same math work for weeks at time it gets frustrating and you wonder why your kid basically gets ignored at school. It's also that attitude that has so many parents leaving the school system for private, charter and homeschools.
Although I agree that our school system could use some work I would like to add two points (good post tluv00, by the way):
1. Parents need to take more responsibility for their children's education!! There is too much blaming the teachers, administration, society, etc. I went to one of the worst schools on Long Island and went on to graduate top of my class in college, have a great job, and am looking into my MBA. This was from good parenting and support from family not the hole of a school I went to.
2. We need to be careful what we wish for. Some of these other countries may have better schools but you wouldn't want to fall under some of their other government systems. We need to improve schools, yes, but we need to be careful how much of our lives we let the government run.
I believe one problem is many equate a focus to improve low achievers to mean ignoring or neglected kids who are high achievers. Most of us want the BEST for our kids and there is nothing wrong with that. The reality is however that there are children who don't stand a chance for one reason or another, including and especially the type of parents they were born to. Higher achieving kids will do well with less focus because they're self sufficient to an extent and/or their environment outside of school is more conducive to learning. The low achievers need more attention. The school systems need to focus on these children so that there are eventually more kids in college rather than the prison system or sitting in a single parent home perpetuating the endless cycle when their children reach school age.
So would we be in support of allowing kids who test as "gifted" to volunarily quit school if it is too boring for them and allow them to educate themselves?
I believe one problem is many equate a focus to improve low achievers to mean ignoring or neglected kids who are high achievers. Most of us want the BEST for our kids and there is nothing wrong with that. The reality is however that there are children who don't stand a chance for one reason or another, including and especially the type of parents they were born to. Higher achieving kids will do well with less focus because they're self sufficient to an extent and/or their environment outside of school is more conducive to learning. The low achievers need more attention. The school systems need to focus on these children so that there are eventually more kids in college rather than the prison system or sitting in a single parent home perpetuating the endless cycle when their children reach school age.
I agree to a point, but my experience is the higher achievers suffer when left to their own accords almost as much as the slower learners when forced to sit through mainstreamed classrooms.
Yes, in a perfect world, we want the kids who lack so much at home to flourish in the classroom, grasp the importance of education and find where they fall in the great scheme of life. But it is a fine, fine line and I truly believe it is not very equitable at this point in many schools across the country.
I agree to a point, but my experience is the higher achievers suffer when left to their own accords almost as much as the slower learners when forced to sit through mainstreamed classrooms.
Many interesting points on this thread...this is also a very good point. My son is very bright, excelling with math skills... I also believe that if he was not challenged by his teachers or the advanced programs in his school, he would, without a complaint on his end, stay mainstreamed with the rest of the class. I believe children that score above average need as much guidance, encouragement, and attention as those that do not...I also have experienced that some of the children struggling academically can also have behavorial issues that, if not controlled can be distracting to the mainstream kids and those that perform above their grade level.
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.
) we had the AG program we went through if we were determined to be "gifted" and let me tell you...it -really- helped to relieve the boredom a kid can feel if they are performing above their grade-level. Granted, it was only 2 days a week, but still...the classes we had were -awesome-.
Yes!
