"Young, Gifted & Neglected"

[vanillacourage]

www.nytimes.com/2012/09/19/opinion/gifted-students-deserve-more-opportunities.html?pagewanted=1&src=un&feedurl=http://json8.nytimes.com/pages/opinion/index.jsonp

Snippet:

Every motivated, high-potential young American deserves a similar opportunity. But the majority of very smart kids lack the wherewithal to enroll in rigorous private schools. They depend on public education to prepare them for life. Yet that system is failing to create enough opportunities for hundreds of thousands of these high-potential girls and boys.

Mostly, the system ignores them, with policies and budget priorities that concentrate on raising the floor under low-achieving students. A good and necessary thing to do, yes, but we’ve failed to raise the ceiling for those already well above the floor.

Public education’s neglect of high-ability students doesn’t just deny individuals opportunities they deserve. It also imperils the country’s future supply of scientists, inventors and entrepreneurs.

Today’s systemic failure takes three forms.

First, we’re weak at identifying “gifted and talented” children early, particularly if they’re poor or members of minority groups or don’t have savvy, pushy parents.

Second, at the primary and middle-school levels, we don’t have enough gifted-education classrooms (with suitable teachers and curriculums) to serve even the existing demand. Congress has “zero-funded” the Jacob K. Javits Gifted and Talented Students Education Program, Washington’s sole effort to encourage such education. Faced with budget crunches and federal pressure to turn around awful schools, many districts are cutting their advanced classes as well as art and music.

Third, many high schools have just a smattering of honors or Advanced Placement classes, sometimes populated by kids who are bright but not truly prepared to succeed in them.

Thoughts?

[mominatrix]

Truth.

[Deleted]

it is about right.

I'm thankful I have the resources to enrich my children's "giftedness" outside the classroom.

[Deleted]

I was definitely way under-challenged. And I didn't know what AP or IB was until college. A little late. My rural school was lucky we had an actual calculus teacher and didn't have to take it via satellite.

[keylimepie]

I agree. I was extremely fortunate to get a good advanced education in public schools. My elementary and junior high schools had excellent gifted programs, and the teachers and administrators of those programs made sure that we were prepared for/knew how to enroll in the IB/AP classes in high school.

I fully realize how lucky I was. It's terrible that many kids' intelligence and precocity goes without being nurtured. I also think that teachers need to be more on the lookout for kids who excel in specific areas. Too many kids who struggle with one subject are branded as less intelligent and don't have the opportunity to focus on other subjects that they may be much better at (and get advanced instruction in these areas).

[downtoearth]

I'm torn on this. Personally, I was a fast learner and tested into the G&T program (in 2nd grade to start in 3rd-5th). We had/have G&T from 3rd to 5th as an auxillery program to the classroom - gifted kids gather together once a week and do interesting projects/activities.

I also think my education was pretty good and that I had a lot of opportunity for gifted/accelerated activities within the classroom (i.e., worked on my own and ahead of everyone in 5th grade math and so I finished both 5th and 6th grade math in one year, or in 2nd grade I would finish my "work" first and then get to go to a back room in the classroom to do logic and fun puzzle-work activities). Plus in High School I was easily able to take all honors classes, which included AP history, chemistry, english, 2 calculus college-courses at our local college during the school day, etc.

The only time that most of the gifted stuff wasn't around was in middle school - I had honors math, but not much else.

Now that I have a 1st grader, I realize from a parent/teacher perspective that it really takes great teachers to challenge both a G&T student and a low performing student. I think a lot of that happens in classrooms with well supported/educated teachers, but overwhelmed and newer teachers without mentors/help can't do all of that. Plus, the population in our city (and most of the cities in our state) is too small to support full G&T schools in each city.

I think it does come down to funding, but I don't know if it should be community funding to support G&T since the kids are meeting/exceeding public school criteria or if it should be primarily federal/state funding.

ETA: Oh and I think having blended-type classes where the teacher is teaching 4th-5th or 6th-7th math in the same class is super hard for the teacher, but as an accelerated student, it was really helpful for me. I basically skipped a grade in math and science and was able to go ahead in high school and not do the same work I did the year before.

[basilosaurus]

I've come more and more to realize how my educational background is so completely different than norm. I knew APs weren't as common in other schools as in mine, but I thought they generally still existed in fairly robust amounts.

H found some data recently, and my high school was one of the top 3 or 5 with the highest (can't remember) per student AP exam rate in the country. That just blew my mind. He went to an excellent public school, got into the same university I did, so I thought he would have had similar access. I didn't expect them to have a (non-AP) course beyond calculus bc like we did for people who had done both calc classes before senior year, but I expected way more than what they had.

So, with that background of all my peers being such over achievers (I was considered a slacker for not caring to apply to any Ivy) it makes me wonder how well many of them would have done in a typical public school. And conversely, how many kids without the resources to attend my school would have excelled there if given the opportunity.

[eclaires]

I agree w/ mx to a degree about private schools, esp Catholic schools, but mostly at the k-8 level. Catholic schools at the high school level are generally much better. My high school had quite a few AP options, very comparable to the public schools in the good districts and good private schools (non Catholic).

Jackson is in public school, and his teacher has already talked to me about enrichment for him, and honestly, I think we will keep him in public schools because of that - for now at least. The Catholic school is pretty good, but it's still a Catholic school. They just don't have the funding all the time at the k-8 level.

But I know my kids are lucky in that if we felt like they needed more of a challenge or enrichment, we would try to give it to them at home, and if we could figure it out financially we would pay for a private school (non-Catholic). I do think the majority of the focus is on the kids struggling, and I understand it... but at the same time, I think kids who are really smart can get lost in the cracks pretty easily, too.

[BNL2]

I work in a "good" district and honestly, very little focus is given to G &T. Every elementary has a part-time teacher and there are honors and AP classes at the secondary level, but in discussions about student success, G&T is always a second thought. So while technically students have the opportunities to experience a challenging curriculum, they don't get much out of it because the programs are poorly supported.