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.
Gifted kids should do work a grade level or two below them just because you happen to be overworked?
This isn't just wrong. It's frightening.
No, they can always move up a grade. And it's not because I'm overworked. It's because it cheats other students who are struggling to just get to average. You don't give more to the ones who have more when you have kids who don't have enough. Giving more to the gifted is like someone who has already eaten taking cuts in line ahead of someone who hasn't to get seconds. The gifted child already has what society has deemed public school should teach for that grade level and then some. I think we get more bang for our buck, as a society, if we help the child who can't read yet first. The simple solution to handling gifted kids is just move them up a grade. Why do you need a special class that teaches the same material taught in the next grade?
Also, because gifted children are gifted, you could probably put more of them in a class so the class sizes can be larger at the magenet school meaning that more teachers can be placed in other schools.
You really have no idea what constitutes gifted, do you?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivorytickler
BTW, I have a gifted child. I have two brothers who are gifted. I have three nephews and one neice who are gifted.
Which just makes it all the more astonishing...unless they're being educated in the sort of district which basically uses "gifted" status as a Good Mommy award, and doesn't reflect actual superior abilities.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivorytickler
I believe there is actually more benefit from taking an honors class for kids who are not in the top 10% than there is for the kids who are in the top 10%.
Well, here's part of the problem-- "top 10%" is not synonymous with "gifted". Giftedness is generally defined as two standard deviations from the mean, roughly 2-3% of the population.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivorytickler
Given extra challenges actually helps her increase her ability. However, again, I don't think the school owes this to her.
Odd. I thought increasing someone's ability was rather the point of education.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivorytickler
The objective is an educated society and you have to put the money where it will do the most good towards attaining that goal. And again, she's in a district large enough that it's not an issue to offer honors classes. So she gets to take them, however, I would not expect any school to offer them to her at the expense of another student.
What you define isn't an educated society. It's a minimally educated one. There's an enormous difference-- and it's a bar that has not only not been set high, but is liable to be tripped over it's set so low.
Let's assume that a 4th-grade "normal" class starts at the same level and teaches the same material as a 3rd-grade "gifted" class, as you imply. I don't think that assumption is true, but let's say it is.
If they're at the same level to start with, wouldn't the really smart kids learn a lot faster throughout the year? Wouldn't they be slowed down by their less intelligent peers? Isn't this wasteful?
I think a lot of this debate results on beliefs about innate intelligence. I'm a huge believer in innate intelligence. Based on your comments (gifted kids aren't smart, they've just "been given" a lot, and they "don't need" any more), I don't think you are. Let me know if I'm wrong.
The aim of public eduction is attaining an educated society. The job is already done with the gifted. They are capable of doing it by themselves. The effort needs to go to the kids who cannot do it themselves.
That's a nice excuse to use, if one happens to be a teacher who needs to excuse why the gifted children in her program are failing. However, it's not the case. While some gifted individuals (and some not gifted) are natural unschoolers, and need only minimal direction, other children-- gifted and not-- require more external structure. "Gifted" is not an educational equivalent of "no assembly required".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivorytickler
Not in giving even more advantage to kids who already are advantaged. Your argument is like saying the rich deserve more tax breaks because they NEED a higher lifestyle.
Wrong again.
You seem to believe that intellectual brilliance is just an amped up version of normal intelligence: smart, on steriods. Yet you've said this isn't the whole story with your gifted daughter-- so why should it be the whole story with every other gifted child?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivorytickler
Yup, every child deserves an appropriate public education but appropriate doesn't mean specialized unless the child has issues spelled out in an IEP. Nothing extra is owed to the gifted. They are owed an eduction to the level that society has deemed public education should supply one. When they reach that level, the job is done. It is not of benefit to society (the public in public education ) to give them even more because they already have what public school was designed to deliver. At that point, the benefit to society is putting effort into a child who has yet to attain the minimum. You might keep them out of jail by doing so.
And here we have it-- a teacher who is not interested in doing one whit more than minimum, and complains even about that. If ever one needed to explain the reason for the rising popularity of homeschooling, this is absolutely IT.
The public has decided what we expect the average high school student to know.
Also not true. The curriculum committees, who by and large see "children" as a word which means "unit of work" rather than "person", determine how children are taught, and the state board of education (a group of positions historically subject to the most blatant cronyism) determines state standards. The public has little to nothing to do with the process.
That's a nice excuse to use, if one happens to be a teacher who needs to excuse why the gifted children in her program are failing. However, it's not the case. While some gifted individuals (and some not gifted) are natural unschoolers, and need only minimal direction, other children-- gifted and not-- require more external structure. "Gifted" is not an educational equivalent of "no assembly required".
Wrong again.
You seem to believe that intellectual brilliance is just an amped up version of normal intelligence: smart, on steriods. Yet you've said this isn't the whole story with your gifted daughter-- so why should it be the whole story with every other gifted child?
And here we have it-- a teacher who is not interested in doing one whit more than minimum, and complains even about that. If ever one needed to explain the reason for the rising popularity of homeschooling, this is absolutely IT.
Well, the gifted kids in my program aren't failing so I guess I'm off the hook
What form giftedness takes is irrelevent. The public school system is a school system designed for the masses not the individual. The individual needs to take the path that best fits them and adapt if they're at the high end. If they're bored in the grade they're in than move them up. The system has to adapt at the low end because those kids cannot.
No, I don't think brilliance is amped up normal intelligence. Please link to the post where I said that. What I've said is when you're born at an advantage, the world doesn't owe you because of it. If anything, the gifted child bears more responsibility for their own education because they are gifted. They are more capable so more should be expected of them. I really don't get the insistance they NEED special programs. Do they cease to be gifted if we don't treat them special? Either they're gifted or they're not. They won't stop being gifted if no one offers honors classes.
If they're that ahead that it's causing issues, move them up until you find a level that doesn't create issues. There is no need for special programs for the already advantaged. If you want one, then go find a private or magnet school that offers one. We didn't move dd because we felt the public school owed her. We moved her because we wanted to see what she'd do in a system that let her go at her own pace. She wouldn't have ceased to be gifted had she stayed in her old school. She just would have learned to deal with more boredom.
The mistake you're making is that a certain type of education enhances intelligence. It doesn't. Intelligence is innate. It doesn't need cultivating at a particular time at a particular rate to be maintained. If a system has excess to spend on the advantaged, great, but if they don't, the choice has to be helping the child who is struggling just to get to average. For them, education can make a huge difference. It's not going to make much difference for the gifted. They're gifted anyway.
Whether she has honors classes or not, my dd is gifted. If her only option were regular classes, I'd tell her to figure out how to make her assignments more interesting to her. I don't think school has to meet her level nor do I think it needs to entertain her. I also don't think the school owes her because she was born with a high IQ. I'd rather have her in honors classes but that's just because I don't have to listen to her whine. I don't think it would hurt her if they were unavailable. We'd just grade bump as we've done twice now anyway.
I have two gifted brothers who didn't have honors class one. Both have excelled in both edudation and life. I have a gifted niece who is just finishing he doctorate who also never had a gifted class in her life. There is no gifted program in the school system she attended. Didn't stop her. Her brother is right behind her. I do not see a NEED for honors classes. I understand wanting them. The more kids learn, the higher they'll score on standardized tests that determine things like scholarships and college admissions but that's not what public education is about. It's about producing an educated public. You look at what will result in getting the highest percentage of kids to proficiency not what helping the 3% at the top do more will do.
As to your comments on homeschooling, that's one option if you think an education catered to your child is what your child needs. I don't think education needs to cater to my child. I think the schools need to do what is best for the masses with the resources they have available. We, simply, do not fund our schools to a level where we can individualize education for everyone. Why do the gifted deserve special classes? Why not kids who have different learning styles? Why not have classes for visual learners and hands on learners instead? How many more kids would you benefit if you did that?
Public education simply isn't about maximizing your child. It's about educating a group of kids.
As to gifted kids in my classes and my not wanting to do more, it's up to them to do more. I offer to let them go deeper but they never take me up on it. One thing they don't want is extra work.
Last edited by Ivorytickler; 12-04-2009 at 08:47 PM..
Well, the gifted kids in my program aren't failing so I guess I'm off the hook
What form giftedness takes is irrelevent. The public school system is a school system designed for the masses not the individual. The individual needs to take the path that best fits them and adapt if they're at the high end. If they're bored in the grade they're in than move them up. The system has to adapt at the low end because those kids cannot.
No, I don't think brilliance is amped up normal intelligence. Please link to the post where I said that. What I've said is when you're born at an advantage, the world doesn't owe you because of it. If anything, the gifted child bears more responsibility for their own education because they are gifted. They are more capable so more should be expected of them. I really don't get the insistance they NEED special programs. Do they cease to be gifted if we don't treat them special? Either they're gifted or they're not. They won't stop being gifted if no one offers honors classes.
I'm sorry, but this is gibberish. You say more should be expected of gifted students, but you advocate expecting less, by placing them in classes well below their ability.
If they're that ahead that it's causing issues, move them up until you find a level that doesn't create issues. There is no need for special programs for the already advantaged. If you want one, then go find a private or magnet school that offers one. We didn't move dd because we felt the public school owed her. We moved her because we wanted to see what she'd do in a system that let her go at her own pace. She wouldn't have ceased to be gifted had she stayed in her old school. She just would have learned to deal with more boredom.
Is this what education is all about for you? Creating kids who don't "cause issues?" That's pretty sad.
The mistake you're making is that a certain type of education enhances intelligence. It doesn't. Intelligence is innate. It doesn't need cultivating at a particular time at a particular rate to be maintained. If a system has excess to spend on the advantaged, great, but if they don't, the choice has to be helping the child who is struggling just to get to average. For them, education can make a huge difference. It's not going to make much difference for the gifted. They're gifted anyway.
Intelligence is innate, that's correct. But surely it exists to be more than "maintained." How about maybe "applied," "directed," or "realized?" Maintained? Like blood pressure?
Whether she has honors classes or not, my dd is gifted. If her only option were regular classes, I'd tell her to figure out how to make her assignments more interesting to her. I don't think school has to meet her level nor do I think it needs to entertain her. I also don't think the school owes her because she was born with a high IQ. I'd rather have her in honors classes but that's just because I don't have to listen to her whine. I don't think it would hurt her if they were unavailable. We'd just grade bump as we've done twice now anyway.
I have two gifted brothers who didn't have honors class one. Both have excelled in both edudation and life. I have a gifted niece who is just finishing he doctorate who also never had a gifted class in her life. There is no gifted program in the school system she attended. Didn't stop her. Her brother is right behind her. I do not see a NEED for honors classes. I understand wanting them. The more kids learn, the higher they'll score on standardized tests that determine things like scholarships and college admissions but that's not what public education is about. It's about producing an educated public. You look at what will result in getting the highest percentage of kids to proficiency not what helping the 3% at the top do more will do.
Your overarching attitude is that intelligent people live happily ever after, and their only worthwhile purpose is helping everyone else catch up. That attitude is, in my opinion, lethal to human development.
Your overarching attitude is that intelligent people live happily ever after, and their only worthwhile purpose is helping everyone else catch up. That attitude is, in my opinion, lethal to human development.
Unto those who are given much, much is expected. Students are not limited to doing just what the class does. They can go deeper. They can choose to do more and in this high tech day and age, it's pretty easy to do so. I'm not even gifted and I used to make my projects bigger and go deeper...of course then I never finished on time so I flunked half of my assignments, lol. Never did get that deadline thing down.
This has nothing to do with attitude. It has to do with realities. Reality is that it benefits society more to teach 10 children to read than to give 10 gifted kids an honors class. The gifted kids are going to do fine anyway. The students who can't read won't. If a choice must be made, it's clear which choice must be made.
As I've said, repeatedly, we do not fund our schools to the point that education can be individualized without someone else paying a price. Logically, those who are already at an advantage wouldn't be the ones you cater to. No, I don't think G&T programs are necessary. They're nice, if you can afford them, but they are not necessary.
No, they can always move up a grade. ... The simple solution to handling gifted kids is just move them up a grade. Why do you need a special class that teaches the same material taught in the next grade?
1) No, you can't. We've already been through that.
2) It is not the right move for every gifted kid, even when they are academically advanced across the board, even if it works for most.
3) If they are only advanced in one subject, then doing a full grade skip is bad.
4) The skip only works for a few, because the PACE IS STILL STULTIFYING after the first couple months of review.
5) It does nothing for the non-traditional gifted students - the ones most at risk of dropping out.
As to gifted kids in my classes and my not wanting to do more, it's up to them to do more. I offer to let them go deeper but they never take me up on it.
With your attitude about them, I can't blame them.
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.
Giving more to the gifted is like someone who has already eaten taking cuts in line ahead of someone who hasn't to get seconds. The gifted child already has what society has deemed public school should teach for that grade level and then some. I think we get more bang for our buck, as a society, if we help the child who can't read yet first. The simple solution to handling gifted kids is just move them up a grade. Why do you need a special class that teaches the same material taught in the next grade?
) to give them even more because they already have what public school was designed to deliver. At that point, the benefit to society is putting effort into a child who has yet to attain the minimum. You might keep them out of jail by doing so.