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.
Under recent reform policies that heavily emphasize closing achievement gaps, are America's gifted and talented students being neglected by program and budget cuts? Have you seen anything firsthand in your district that is consistent with this phenomenon? Additionally, what are the implications for policies that take money away from gifted and talented programs to fund other initiatives?
Current education reforms are meant to close the gaps between the highest and lowest achieving students. One way to close the gap is to bring the top down. It makes no sense as a nation to neglect the education of our brightest citizens who are the most likely to be our innovators and generate wealth. However, as long as the goal remains to close the gap, rather than to raise achievement overall that is what we will get.
This isn't really news. America's top students have been more or less left to fend for themselves for decades during the students' primary and secondary years. American culture, for some reason (I have some theories), does not want to accept that some people are objectively more intelligent than others. Americans can grasp that one can be stronger, taller, more athletic, higher social class, higher income potential, more artistic, etc but believe that raw intellect is different and evenly distributed, with educational outcomes tied to some exogenous variable (upbringing, household income, school district, etc).
This isn't really news. America's top students have been more or less left to fend for themselves for decades during the students' primary and secondary years.
This is why a National Recommended Reading List would be useful and not very expensive.
Trying to learn on your own just from books is extremely frustrating because most books are crap. But finding a really good book that explains things well is more exhilarating than most teachers. Teachers who try to make their subject exciting when you find it boring are annoying even if the subject is easy. Oh yeah, compare West Side Story to Romeo and Juliet, whoop dee doo. Catcher in the Rye, oh please.
In PA, gifted students are under the umbrella of Special services and get IEP's, or G(gifted)IEP. Gifted Education It's the middle students that have no extra attention..
This is why a National Recommended Reading List would be useful and not very expensive.
Trying to learn on your own just from books is extremely frustrating because most books are crap. But finding a really good book that explains things well is more exhilarating than most teachers. Teachers who try to make their subject exciting when you find it boring are annoying even if the subject is easy. Oh yeah, compare West Side Story to Romeo and Juliet, whoop dee doo. Catcher in the Rye, oh please.
I think you have made this suggestion before but I don't see it happening.
First of all, a National Recommended Reading List would be based on cultural literacy, which your title suggests. Your explanation, however is suggesting something totally different. You seem to me more interested in a reading list out of Popular Mechanics since you seem to be only suggesting books that explain things. You also seem to be someone who would rather read a book to learn how to do something rather than listen to an instructor. People have different learning styles and some people learn best from an excellent teacher who tries to make their subject exciting.
You also appear to critical of reading any literature that is common in most high school English classes. What would you replace these books with or would you just eliminate English classes?
Last edited by villageidiot1; 04-19-2014 at 11:40 AM..
That's an understatement. This is probably the third or fourth thread that I've started that he's hijacked with almost the exact same post each time. He should start his own thread about the topic and let people post to it rather than engaging in this type of trollish behavior.
This isn't really news. America's top students have been more or less left to fend for themselves for decades during the students' primary and secondary years. American culture, for some reason (I have some theories), does not want to accept that some people are objectively more intelligent than others. Americans can grasp that one can be stronger, taller, more athletic, higher social class, higher income potential, more artistic, etc but believe that raw intellect is different and evenly distributed, with educational outcomes tied to some exogenous variable (upbringing, household income, school district, etc).
To your first point, I'm wondering if recent trends are making it worse. We had gifted programs when I was younger, but (anecdotally) it seems like there's a trend to cut them in favor of programs to try to bring up the lowest achievers.
I think it is worst in elementary where tracking is a bad word. I feel many smart students start developing bad habits due to everything coming easy to them.
Luckily, once middle school and high school roll around, the top performing students get into the honors and then AP class' which allow them to be with more like minded students.
Under recent reform policies that heavily emphasize closing achievement gaps, are America's gifted and talented students being neglected by program and budget cuts? Have you seen anything firsthand in your district that is consistent with this phenomenon? Additionally, what are the implications for policies that take money away from gifted and talented programs to fund other initiatives?
As the mother of a G&T student, I'm not convinced that spending extra money on G&T programs is warranted. Now 10 years ago, I would have been pushing for it but now that my dd is 16, I think most of what was done "for her" was really a waste of effort. I don't think she's any farther ahead now than she would have been if we'd just left her in the regular classes. In fact, I think she's farther behind because of what they've done. In hindsight, I don't think G&T kids (talking the garden variety not the uber gifted who just don't fit in anywhere except with a group of kids like them) need something extra. I think they do just fine as the smartest kids in the class. I think my dd would have done better had we just left her as the smartest kid in the class instead of trying to accommodate her giftedness and push her.
As a teacher, I see very bright kids every day who had nothing special done for them growing up to become very capable young adults and that is what it's all about. While children need to be learning all the time, I don't think that everything has to be a challenge all the time. In retrospect I find myself asking questions like; "What is wrong with learning being easy for them?". "Why did I think it was an issue when she was 8?". If I had it to do again, my dd would not have been placed on the G&T track. I didn't know better back then. While I support totally separate G&T programs for kids who are uber gifted and just don't fit in, I'm thinking the garden variety gifted child should just be left to bloom brighter than the other kids where they are. We found out the hard way that emotional maturity and intellectual maturity don't necessarily track together. When dd hit high school, her lack of emotional maturity bit her on the butt.
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.
Catcher in the Rye, oh please.
