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 agree with this but there are also very intelligent people with "regular" and low IQs and I feel they should be included as well.
When I was about 12 or 13 I took an IQ test and it was a 113 but it said the test was designed for people over 18 and the results may be flawed for people under 18.
I know this is unrelated but is a 113 IQ low, regular, or high?
Hrrm... mine was definitely a separate gifted program... was in it from 2nd grade until graduation from h.s., sometimes they weren't available though, I hated taking honors courses as opposed to gifted or AP. My parents moved from their little beach community to a bigger city 2 hours away just so I could be in it. In elementary I was in a same "class" with everybody else but we went off to a separate school two days a week and learned our own stuff. Middle school-High school there were separate classes. Ex. general english/honors english/gifted english. The cutoff to get in was 130 IQ.
I agree with the OPer 100%. The so called gifted programs are a joke. Those programs are poorly put together. What they do is figure out the average and group them into one catagory, below in another and anyone even slightly above average inanother. They measure emtional development, which has been proven to often be lower than their average peers for gifted kids, which screws many out of the program while they would very much excel if allowed to participate.
Look at it this way....would you place a child who is hardly behind in a couple of subjects together to learn with someone who is profoundly retarded? Would that be fair for that child? The same goes for gifted kids. Profoundly gifted kids won't be helped much by these programs. They should be allowed to excel as far and as fast as they can. Multiple sudies have proven the effectiveness of this but most schools will not allow a child to progress above two grades ahead of average
A great example is DD. She is some place between 6th and 12th grades depending on the subject. Would the local school allow her to go that far beyond her second grade age peers? No and she would be greatly bored and saddened, as she gets now, when people treat her with a lack of respect and talk down to her like she is an average 7 year old.
All the school districts in my county (17 of them) have gifted programs.
I am surprised that is not the norm.
Actually, many schools are cutting these. With the economy it is a quick cut because it isn't like the kids will fall academically behind, thought they do not look at future outcomes such as higher drop out rates.
Our community did not pass a referendum two years in a row that would allow the administrative people to get bigger pay checks while not increasing anything of any real value for the kids. As a punishment they, the best school district in this region of the state for above average kids with a seperate school for them, shut down the programs, cut band, recess, sports, ect.
I agree with the OPer 100%. The so called gifted programs are a joke. Those programs are poorly put together. What they do is figure out the average and group them into one catagory, below in another and anyone even slightly above average inanother. They measure emtional development, which has been proven to often be lower than their average peers for gifted kids, which screws many out of the program while they would very much excel if allowed to participate.
Look at it this way....would you place a child who is hardly behind in a couple of subjects together to learn with someone who is profoundly retarded? Would that be fair for that child? The same goes for gifted kids. Profoundly gifted kids won't be helped much by these programs. They should be allowed to excel as far and as fast as they can. Multiple sudies have proven the effectiveness of this but most schools will not allow a child to progress above two grades ahead of average
A great example is DD. She is some place between 6th and 12th grades depending on the subject. Would the local school allow her to go that far beyond her second grade age peers? No and she would be greatly bored and saddened, as she gets now, when people treat her with a lack of respect and talk down to her like she is an average 7 year old.
At the same time though, it would be challenging socially to place her in a class of 15 year olds at her age. Her particular needs should be looked at and addressed rather than simply skipping her ahead six grades, so she can get the proper intellectual stimulation without skewing her social & emotional growth.
Actually, many schools are cutting these. With the economy it is a quick cut because it isn't like the kids will fall academically behind, thought they do not look at future outcomes such as higher drop out rates.
Our community did not pass a referendum two years in a row that would allow the administrative people to get bigger pay checks while not increasing anything of any real value for the kids. As a punishment they, the best school district in this region of the state for above average kids with a seperate school for them, shut down the programs, cut band, recess, sports, ect.
The experimental program I was in was shut down about 5 years ago...
Charles Murray argues that the most intellectually able should have their abilities both challenged and nurtured - for their own sakes and for society's, as well:
"The problem with the education of the gifted involves not their professional training, but their training as citizens. We live in an age when it is unfashionable to talk about the special responsibility of being gifted, because to do so acknowledges inequality of ability, and this sounds elitist."
I agree 100%.
If we spent half as much money on the smart kids as we do on their slower peers, we'd have some amazing people coming out of our schools.
At the same time though, it would be challenging socially to place her in a class of 15 year olds at her age. Her particular needs should be looked at and addressed rather than simply skipping her ahead six grades, so she can get the proper intellectual stimulation without skewing her social & emotional growth.
Actual experts say it best....kids should play with same age kids but it is best for gifted kids to learn at their own rates.
Time had an article a couple years ago about this. It has become very difficult for gifted kids and their families since so many people think that this kind of thing is forced. It always hurts my feelings to think that people would think that about our kids. We start school in mid August and stop about mid may. By the end, it averages out that my children attend school 4 days a week at four hours a day so I have no clue where this comes from. It is sad. Being intelligent is no longer something to be proud of in our culture. This forces gifted kids to be under achievers. It also leaves them in a position where they do not fit in. Why do we force our kids to only interact with kids their age? You think it is unhealthy for children to have friends based on interest or skills and would rather them force themselves to be someone/something they are not? You are looking for trouble later. It is just sad.
People have become so disconnected with giftedness and have decided that is insignificant and they put our misunderstanding of "socialization" ahead of the actual needs of our children. We think there is something wrong with them. In fact, it is often diagnosed as ADD or ADHD.
Quote:
There is some evidence that as many as half of all kids with IQs above 130 get below average grades, and in one study 13% of high school drop outs were gifted. In another study, a full 25% of children diagnosed with ADHD tested so high in creativity tests they qualified for state scholarships. I recently spoke with a consultant for the gifted who said about half of the gifted boys referred to her had been told they were probably ADD (from born to explore.org)
In reality, every study done has supported grade skipping. Let us say that the schools suddenly decided that this would be the route to go. Unfortunately, parents think that either somehow knowledge is going to make their kid grow up to fast or they are so use to treating them like an average kid (which drives them crazy) that they do not feel they are ready for it, especially if they are having difficulty fitting in, such as my daughter who I've seen talking with other girls her age about something really cool she's discovered and they want to know why she cares because they don't understand it, but with older or brighter kids she fits in just fine and they have stimulating conversation to offer back.
Hoagies gifted education page is a good resource. I was turned off with the last site I quoted, though what I quoted is consistent across other sources, when they used the word idiot as an adjective for the word savant. I think it poorly represents how people perceive many of us parents with gifted kids; berating those who are on the other end of the spectrum because many of us had to deal with a lot of those issues as gifted kids often do have learning disabilities to go along with their gift. It is hard enough seeking support then to have people painting a bad picture with a minority opinion.
I was just digging around on their site (while typing this) and read the logo story for the first time. It is a GREAT comparison for the gifted child. http://www.stephanietolan.com/is_it_a_cheetah.htm
This long article starts off with....
Quote:
The child who does well in school, gets good grades, wins awards, and "performs" beyond the norms for his or her age, is considered talented. The child who does not, no matter what his innate intellectual capacities or developmental level, is less and less likely to be identified, less and less likely to be served.
A cheetah metaphor can help us see the problem with achievement-oriented thinking.
First of all, does anyone see anything wrong with this passage? Did you know that some tigers that were rehabilitated to live on an African reserve were clocked running at 70 miles an hour? Cheetahs that fastest land animals??? Nah. That is not the point though, just a pet peeve of mind when out dated information is taught to kids. The correlation with this is that a gifted kid might catch on with that and challenge their teacher and the kid would be told they were wrong even though they are right.
Another quote from above article:
Quote:
If a cheetah is confined to a 10 X 12 foot cage, though it may pace or fling itself against the bars in restless frustration, it won't run 70 mph.
IS IT STILL A CHEETAH?
If a cheetah has only 20 mph rabbits to chase for food, it won't run 70 mph while hunting. If it did, it would flash past its prey and go hungry! Though it might well run on its own for exercise, recreation, fulfillment of its internal drive, when given only rabbits to eat the hunting cheetah will run only fast enough to catch a rabbit.
IS IT STILL A CHEETAH?
Schools can do the same for their highly gifted children.
Unless we make a commitment to saving these children, we will continue to lose them and whatever unique benefit their existence might provide for the human species of which they are an essential part.
Another article:
Quote:
This article is a book chapter by Lynn Pollins. It discusses studies on acceleration as it relates to the student's social and emotional development. There has never been a study that showed a negative result of acceleration. By contrast, there may even be positive effects to the social and emotional development of accelerants.
and...
Quote:
Keys's (1938) carefully controlled study compared a group of gifted accelerated students with a sample of equally bright nonaccelerants. Further, two subgroups of accelerants were defined according to I.Q.; one group of accelerants had IQs below 120 and another had IQs greater than 136. The effects of acceleration could thus be analyzed in terms of both intelligence and chronological age.
Last edited by toobusytoday; 10-26-2009 at 05:25 AM..
Reason: copyright issues
Charles Murray argues that the most intellectually able should have their abilities both challenged and nurtured - for their own sakes and for society's, as well:
"The problem with the education of the gifted involves not their professional training, but their training as citizens. We live in an age when it is unfashionable to talk about the special responsibility of being gifted, because to do so acknowledges inequality of ability, and this sounds elitist."
The problem is that gifted programs have become surrogates for the very smart, overachievers, and the strategically minded. These "gifted" programs then become little more that bespoke education for the well-off.
Even Murray confuses these.
Now if you believe that the smart and ambitious should get special public schools, then that is fine--but it is a wholly seprate arguments that those consistent with the original intent of gifted programs.
All the school districts in my county (17 of them) have gifted programs.
I am surprised that is not the norm.
we had one where I went to elementary school in Michigan.
we also had art and music classes.
then we moved to Tennessee, and my brother got screwed out of anything of the creative or gifted sort.
but we had football!
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.
I think it poorly represents how people perceive many of us parents with gifted kids; berating those who are on the other end of the spectrum because many of us had to deal with a lot of those issues as gifted kids often do have learning disabilities to go along with their gift. It is hard enough seeking support then to have people painting a bad picture with a minority opinion.
