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.
Upon receiving the results to get into the Gifted and Talented program at school, ...
The results came in and Jennifer said Hannah scored exceptionally well. She said she was told that Hannah scored high enough for some students to get in, but not high enough for Hannah.
"Because Hannah's daddy made a little more money than that and was considered middle class and a higher income, she would have to score a 130," Jennifer said.
"I was mad, I didn't think that was fair," Hannah said.
According to the school district, there are different standards for different students. If a student gets a free or reduced lunch or speaks limited English, the grading scale is different.
Maybe the question should be...
Are the administrators smarter than a fifth grader?
Upon receiving the results to get into the Gifted and Talented program at school, ...
The results came in and Jennifer said Hannah scored exceptionally well. She said she was told that Hannah scored high enough for some students to get in, but not high enough for Hannah.
"Because Hannah's daddy made a little more money than that and was considered middle class and a higher income, she would have to score a 130," Jennifer said.
"I was mad, I didn't think that was fair," Hannah said.
According to the school district, there are different standards for different students. If a student gets a free or reduced lunch or speaks limited English, the grading scale is different.
Maybe the question should be...
Are the administrators smarter than a fifth grader?
In this case, no would be the answer.
If a child speaks limited English and an English language test is used, a gifted child who has limited language proficiency probably would score significantly lower than one who is fluent. But that means s/he should be tested in his or her most proficient language, not just waved through with a lower score.
Where is the school district's explanation? This is all coming just from the parent. There are different standards of gifted from district to district across the whole U.S. In dstricts with lower performing students, with typically higher economically disadvantaged, it will be easier to get into the Gifted program because you could be in a higher percentile on your tests. Each district has their own set of standards and tests.
If you are in a school where the average on a test is a 60 and you score an 80, then you may be classified as gifted. If the average score in the school is a 90 and you score an 80, then you probably will not be classified as gifted. It's all about whether you need special services because you are outside the normal range of ability compared to the population you are with.
This story is why most schools don't release test scores for these things and definitely don't make comments on them, such as you did well and if you were lower income you would have made it. Besides, we use a series of tests, not just one test.
All things are not equal in life. Some kids have a natural advantage. It makes sense to give a leg up to the ones who don't. If a child can come from a disadvantaged background and still score well, that child should be considered the equal of a child who comes from an advantaged background and scores even better. Sometimes, scores are higher just because of who mom and dad are and not because the child is smart and there is a difference between a truely gifted child and a pushed/coached child.
I could push/coach (ok not me as I butt heads with my drama queen ) my oldest to the same level her sister, naturally, settles into but what would I really have accomplished? Would that really mean she belongs on the top G&T track? Or would it mean she just has parents capable of pushing/coaching her? Dd#2, naturally, tests high without pushing/coaching. In her case, if she didn't make the cut on her own, I would push/coach her because that is where she belongs and the way the tests are scored, they will assume an advantaged background is influencing her scores whether or not we push/coach her. Fortunately, we don't have to do that.
If your child did not make the cut, you need to ask yourself whether or not your child is scoring higher because you're pushing her or because she's naturally that bright. If it's the latter, by all means be the squeaky wheel that gets the grease. Go right to the principal and fight this. If it's because you are already pushing/coaching her, rethink this. If she doesn't make the cut because they assumed an advantaged background and you are giving her an advantaged background, the score may be more of a reflection of her background than her true ability. Only you can answer this question. If your child is just missing the mark and you are not pushing/coaching her, then you need to fight for what she needs or push/coach her to get her scoring where she should be. If you're not giving her the advantage they are assuming, give it to her. If you are, accept that she really doesn't belong in the G&T program.
Dd#1 is bright in her own right but she's not G&T track material. I might be able to push her enough to get her there but I'd be pushing her out of her element. She takes the occaisional honors class and that is enough for her. Her sister needs all honors and AP. You know your kids best. Step back and take a real look at your child and any advantages she went into this testing with. Then decide what to do.
Upon receiving the results to get into the Gifted and Talented program at school, ...
The results came in and Jennifer said Hannah scored exceptionally well. She said she was told that Hannah scored high enough for some students to get in, but not high enough for Hannah.
"Because Hannah's daddy made a little more money than that and was considered middle class and a higher income, she would have to score a 130," Jennifer said.
"I was mad, I didn't think that was fair," Hannah said.
According to the school district, there are different standards for different students. If a student gets a free or reduced lunch or speaks limited English, the grading scale is different.
Maybe the question should be...
Are the administrators smarter than a fifth grader?
In this case, no would be the answer.
It's wrong (to me anyway) plain and simple; however, it's certainly not shocking to me.
Maybe the answer should be: Should we trust any so-called data or statistics that tell us our kids are either A. Failing or B. Achieving? Or, should we go beyond that and actually find out what they know? I'm not talking about a good once a year test to gauge where they are (and without them even knowing it's coming btw). I'm talking about the near-viral testing that goes on today.
If they have been sufficiently "taught" to push a lever for a food pellet (so-to-speak) they can pass a test. Nevermind that if you give them a problem to solve, you give them several chances to get the right answer (with them taking every one of those chances) before they get it right. I'm not talking just once to help them understand where they went wrong, I'm talking several before they pass the test.
Let's tie teacher salary with this foolish (IMO) mentality and watch the smoke and mirrors form even more.
It is what it is, and it's name is "Tell me what I want to know - not what is actually going on." Parents need to pay attention to this, and as near as I can tell, they aren't.
It's wrong (to me anyway) plain and simple; however, it's certainly not shocking to me.
Maybe the answer should be: Should we trust any so-called data or statistics that tell us our kids are either A. Failing or B. Achieving? Or, should we go beyond that and actually find out what they know? I'm not talking about a good once a year test to gauge where they are (and without them even knowing it's coming btw). I'm talking about the near-viral testing that goes on today.
If they have been sufficiently "taught" to push a lever for a food pellet (so-to-speak) they can pass a test. Nevermind that if you give them a problem to solve, you give them several chances to get the right answer (with them taking every one of those chances) before they get it right. I'm not talking just once to help them understand where they went wrong, I'm talking several before they pass the test.
Let's tie teacher salary with this foolish (IMO) mentality and watch the smoke and mirrors form even more.
It is what it is, and it's name is "Tell me what I want to know - not what is actually going on." Parents need to pay attention to this, and as near as I can tell, they aren't.
Why is it wrong? IMO, what is wrong is to hold a child's home life against them. Some kids come from disadvantaged backgrounds and don't score as high as their peers who come from better backgrounds. Hence, scores are not equal.
Why is it wrong? IMO, what is wrong is to hold a child's home life against them. Some kids come from disadvantaged backgrounds and don't score as high as their peers who come from better backgrounds. Hence, scores are not equal.
Because I feel that we are being a bit disingenuous when we find ourselves upset with the dumbing down of curriculum because someone can't pass a test. This is no different to me. There should be basic standards that every child should meet by grade, and if they can't, then they should be able to get some help to bring them up to speed. I've known too many kids who have dug themselves out of a bad home life - they were held to the sames standards as everyone else in school.
Also, since the government bases all of its funding on statistical manipulation, I see too much wiggle room for justifying foolhardy spending on flawed statistics.
My first reaction was to agree that using different standards is not fair. However, then I started thinking about giftedness, and in some ways I think using different standards makes some sense.
If one child has lots of advantages in life, and rises above others in the same situation, then that child might be gifted (or very determined!). By the same measure, if another child has few advantages in life, and rises above others in the same situation, then that child might also be gifted, just maybe not as far ahead.
Just my thoughts. I do not have first hand knowledge of the program or the process (no program like that at the schools my kids go to).
Because I feel that we are being a bit disingenuous when we find ourselves upset with the dumbing down of curriculum because someone can't pass a test. This is no different to me. There should be basic standards that every child should meet by grade, and if they can't, then they should be able to get some help to bring them up to speed. I've known too many kids who have dug themselves out of a bad home life - they were held to the sames standards as everyone else in school.
Also, since the government bases all of its funding on statistical manipulation, I see too much wiggle room for justifying foolhardy spending on flawed statistics.
This isn't the same as dumbing down tests. It's recognizing that kids from advantaged backgrounds usually score higher than kids from disadvantaged backgrounds so one child's score of 120 might indicate higher ability than another child's score of 130 on standardized tests. That 120 might be quite remarkable given the child's background while the 130 is typical for another child's background.
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.
) my oldest to the same level her sister, naturally, settles into but what would I really have accomplished? Would that really mean she belongs on the top G&T track? Or would it mean she just has parents capable of pushing/coaching her? Dd#2, naturally, tests high without pushing/coaching. In her case, if she didn't make the cut on her own, I would push/coach her because that is where she belongs and the way the tests are scored, they will assume an advantaged background is influencing her scores whether or not we push/coach her. Fortunately, we don't have to do that. 
Maybe the answer should be: Should we trust any so-called data or statistics that tell us our kids are either A. Failing or B. Achieving? Or, should we go beyond that and actually find out what they know? I'm not talking about a good once a year test to gauge where they are (and without them even knowing it's coming btw). I'm talking about the near-viral testing that goes on today. 
