Gifted and Talented: A Semi-Rant — By Guest Mom Wendy Baldauf
There has been a lot of discussion in PTA circles about the gifted and talented program — what brand of enrichment is it, who is entitled, and who ought to be included but isn’t. In our district the program for the gifted and talented kids is called WINGS, and it’s available to the brightest students in grades 3-8. (That word is italicized because it’s such a loaded and irritating word for me — more on that in a minute...)
Each elementary school in the district has its own WINGS teacher, which means the quality of the enrichment at each school varies because some of the WINGS instructors aren’t great. Sadly, my kid’s school isn’t the best in the district in this regard, but my kids have been and are currently in WINGS: Jesse, who is 15, was included during 6th, 7th, and 8th grade, and Grace, my 4th grader, was invited to join this year. That being said, I’m not convinced it’s actually a positive experience for students.
The mommy-discussions range from “my kid should be included and isn’t” to “it’s so elitist” to “why can’t every student be included?” to “it gives kids with big heads even bigger heads.”
Because of the intrinsic unfairness with giving enrichment to only the brightest, our district has adjusted the program to include everyone in a full-class setting: the WINGS teacher pushes in to each class once a cycle and delivers a fun lesson that is curriculum-based. Even so, the program in our district has unfortunately taken on a “have/ have not” persona — many kids, who are not invited to join WINGS, automatically view themselves as ‘not smart.’ I hear it all the time! This in an indication that the entire system is flawed.
Now, don’t get me wrong: I wouldn’t deny any gifted kid the chance to progress and grow. If our own child was an awesome soccer player, wouldn’t we find her a team? If our child was naturally artistic, wouldn’t we sign her up for lessons? Yes, of course, we would. Same goes for every kid who performs consistently above grade level — that kid deserves to be intellectually challenged.
However, in every class there are bright kids who do not excel academically. Maybe they’re poor test takers. Maybe they weren’t born with a math brain. I clearly remember a conversation I had with my daughter Jesse as a 3rd grader: we were talking about WINGS, and she said “Clara should be in WINGS because she writes cool poetry. And Madison should be too because she’s great friend.” There are so many ways to be great and special, but we’ve been programmed to think that success = academic success and poor academic success = failure. And the whole ‘I’m smart/I’m not smart’ polarization really ticks me off.
If you’re as interested in these things as I am, and would like to read an interesting perspective on education, I just finished a book entitled: Real Education: Four Simple Truths for Bringing Americas Schools Back To Reality by Charles Murray. His in-your-face attitude about public education is refreshing and bold, and his views about how to fix the system are surprising. His perspective certainly challenges some of my closely-held beliefs, particularly about higher education.
Note from Design Mom: the sketches at the top are by my brother-in-law Paul Ferney. He's a fantastic artist — definitely gifted and talented. : ) He's participating in Open Studios this weekend in San Francisco. If you're in the Bay area, you should totally stop by and say Hello.
posted by Gabrielle of Design Mom at Thursday, October 16, 2008
28 Comments:
My daughter was invited to the GATE program starting in 4th grade and I just kind of swept it under the rug for those same reasons. Instead of her attending GATE classes after school we signed her up for piano and compeition level gymnastics. She is doing great in all of them.
Let's keep all of our children well-rounded. If they are excelling in school then they have time for extra activities. But do we have to label them "the smartest kids in the distric"? No, I feel the same way you do and your daughter Jessie said it best in 4th grade. Way to go mom!
I am excited about all these school related posts. My first child will be starting kindergarten next year and I'm a ball of emotions about the whole thing. We live in a great district, but I know there are going to be all sorts of hurdles I haven't even thought about, socially and academically (for both my daughter and me!). If you started a blog, I would totally read it! Thanks!
i hear ya, wendy. i feel just as conflicted about the whole issue as well. in ny there weren't opportunites like wings at roxcy's school, for a few years she had a rough time, in part, i think because she was bored. i've been thrilled with the opportunities she has at her current school. just this year they started a "gifted" program, the whole process was very annoying. they really tried to make it exclusive and special, but in the end i think all the kids originally invited got in the program. rox does love it, but i worry about some of the things you touched on.
in my experience as a public school educator, "gifted and talented" often translates into "parents who are involved and reading and doing homework with their kids."
The public education system is certainly flawed. I am dreading the day when my daughter attends school. Both ends of the spectrum are flawed - the gifted end and the "special-needs" end of education. I have seriously considered home-schooling, but the virtues of being with other children are important too. My father was a truly gifted person, and as a child was offered the opportunity to go to a special school for truly bright and gifted children. My grandmother said no mainly because she did not want him to grow up so isolated from the real world and to give him the opportunity to be a kid. Your statement about adecadmic success=success is too true. Too many people push their children to success and forget that kids need to be kids. Every kid needs time to play (even high school kids). They need time to explore and learn what they can do. Such programs as you noted only add fuel to this desire for the parent to have a successful child.
It is difficult if you have a child who learns quickly or more quickly than the average. There is no easy answer, and I think we try too hard to appease everyone. The end result is no one is happy. Plus, what is the message sent to all of the other children? How does it impact how they interact once out of school? Teachers make assessments of children and pass that along to other teachers. If a child is labeled as gifted, he/she can do no wrong. If a child is labeled as dull, he/she can do no right.
The system is flawed and good for you for making a stand!
I think it was called the Gifted and Talented program when I was in elementary school. I was invited to participate in third grade, but wasn't after that. All of my friends were in there, and it felt like I was always missing some sort of inside joke whenever they talked about it. I know I was affected by it adversely.
Kids should be invited to participate if they're interested. The exclusiveness of these programs is contrived by overzealous parents, afraid that the program would be dirtied if the invitation were open.
Thanks for bringing up such a great subject!
I think it was called the Gifted and Talented program when I was in elementary school. I was invited to participate in third grade, but wasn't after that. All of my friends were in there, and it felt like I was always missing some sort of inside joke whenever they talked about it. I know I was affected by it adversely.
Kids should be invited to participate if they're interested. The exclusiveness of these programs is contrived by overzealous parents, afraid that the program would be dirtied if the invitation were open.
Thanks for bringing up such a great subject!
I was placed in the "gifted program" in the 2nd grade. My parents didn't say much about it, other than I would be going to a different school than my friends. I thought it meant I was behind or slow. Nobody made a big deal. I stayed through 4th grade till a move meant a district change and the program wasn't offered. I think the programs are important, as does my husband, a dedicated public school teacher who feels that often it's our most capable and ambitious students who are underserved. But I struggle with the current branding of the programs as exclusive or elite, rather than simply appropriate for one's abilities.
Wow. My only experience with a TAG program in a regular school is my own as a kid. When I was in 5th and 6th grade, the program was called EA (Educationally Advanced) and an IQ test was used to determine who should be in the program. From four classrooms, five or six kids qualified. We had a separate class once or twice a week where we studied different subjects, some at the EA teacher's suggestion, and some we came up with ourselves. It was really fun, and I still remember a lot of the stuff we learned.
The year after I was in the program, they changed it to include TAG, and kids who weren't just academically gifted, and the program kind of petered out. Yes, every child has different gifts, but opening TAG programs up to all interested comers can mean that the needs of the academically-gifted are still not met.
My oldest child, now in 3rd grade, is more academically advanced than I (or my husband) was. He is not socially or emotionally advanced. We knew from a young age that he would need extra attention to learn social skills, and extra attention to remain academically challenged. He attended a regular preschool for two years, and it was crucial to his social development. Since it was non-academic, he and his classmates were operating on the same level.
In kindergarten, however, academic instruction started, and there was a huge gap between what he already knew and what the other kids were learning (multiplication tables vs. pattern recognition in math; chapter books vs. distinguishing capital and lower-case letters in reading). He didn't act out, because that's not his style, but he did check out, losing interest in school and even at one point telling me he "hate[d] reading."
Because he is not socially and emotionally advanced, I did not want to see him skip grades and miss that social development. We were lucky enough that there is a public alternative program in our area specifically designed for kids whose educational needs are not being met in neighborhood schools. He studies (mostly) with kids his own age and social level, and he's excited (not that he'll admit it) about school.
The whole "elitism" issue is one that I remain puzzled by. A new parent to our program this year even said something about how she'd been pleasantly surprised that the people involved in our program weren't "all elitist and weird." I'm not quite sure how to address that concern--why is it elitist to want your child to be taught at the right level? To not be disengaged from learning? To be challenged and have to learn good study habits? All the same, a common experience between me and other parents of children in our program is dealing with resentment from other parents. I love my child and I enjoy bragging about him, but hardly a day goes by that I don't wish it were a little easier to raise him.
And yeah, I also wish that the same resources were available to him as are available to the kids on the other end of the academic spectrum--but special ed gets about 10 times as much funding, for the same number of students.
Great topic! I was in the Gifted and Talented program as a child as well and can't remember one single thing I did there. However, I remember scores of things covered in the regular classroom.
In son's school it is the GATE program. He was tested but wasn't accepted because the GATE Teacher said he couldn't focus on the test. They said he should retest the following year but never did and I believe it was due to his behavioral problems in the classroom. He is a quick, talented student and would do well in a program like that but my husband and I decided not to address it with either our son or the school for all the reasons you mentioned. It has way too much stigma attached to it and I hate that the students miss regular classroom work. I've also noticed that several students in GATE are just students who work themselves to death to be first or number one, they aren't necessicarly talented lerners. So if that is the criteria, Kyle certainly doesn't qualify. Besides, he's gotten along fine for five years without it.
We do need to keep the brightest kids engaged though - though I agree there isn't one solution to this.
All the projects I remember most from elementary / middle school were from TAG (talented and gifted). I would have been really bored w/o the program. I really wish there was just more time in the day so that everyone could have had the same opportunities. (We had TAG in lieu of an academic class once a week - presumably not all kids could excel missing that class each week..)...We did major research projects, did a stock market game against other schools, went on extra field trips, had guest speakers...
As background: entrance to ours was based on an IQ test we took in 1st grade (yes I know the major issues with those) combined with our teacher recommendations. Once you were in, you were in, was my recollection. It started in 2nd grade..
My town no longer has this due to budget cuts.
I know exactly what you are saying. I am loving your posts. Yea for Guest Mom Wendy!!
I know exactly what you are saying. I am loving your posts. Yea for Guest Mom Wendy!!
Hey Wendy. ... Funny I agree. I was in the GATE program at our school for awhile and I loved it b/c I was challenged in new ways. But the kids also kinda looked at your different.
I like the Swedish ideals on school. They don't start until they are 7. And they have more holidays. They don't do the whole GIFTED thing. They feel that those who finish their work early are there to help teach the others to be better. They learn to be leaders in the process too. It has turned out that their schools are excelling in this regard too. And their happy overall kids.
Got this from a NY Times article recently. Very interesting.
Wish I could check out your boat.
oh yeah ... In sixth grade they didn't call it GATE or WINGS. They entered a few of the kids in the Pentathalon. It was AWESOME. We'd sit aside ourselves in class for just a small part of the day and study for this. But it was only about 8 students. And there was an end goal which made it feel like just a school project not the "Smartest kids on the block" thing. We competed with the district. Lots of fun and less segregated.
Here is my two cents worth...
1st cent:
We don't call it "elitist" when the children struggling to read are given extra teacher time or extra LA time to help them catch up. Why then must we whisper and hide the fact that a child is faster learner? Really, sounds like we only want education to be fair so "no one is left behind"...what about the kids striving to stretch and who aren't permitted to because it may hurt someone's idea of what is fair? Life is not fair, quit penalizing the advanced students.
2 cents: It is important to note that "gifted" and "smart" are two different things. One way to look at it is that "smart is knowing the answers", "gifted" is asking the questions. Both are learning styles and it frustrates me to no end that we can't include these two learnings styles in with the learning needs of anyone else in the class.
I think these programs have a place. I am the mother of a 6 year old who has consistently tested in the top 1/2 of 1 percent for her age on a variety of I.Q. tests. She taught herself to read, add, subtract and multiply by the age of four (we had very little to do with it...I was busy with a younger child who had serious health issues and my husband travels constantly). My husband was the same way as a kid, and I can tell you that sometimes smart kids get left behind too. My daughter's brain works differently from other kids her age, and that has been the case practically from birth. She needs a program that moves faster, is more experiential and allows her to explore a greater diversity of ideas than what generally is presented in a regular classroom. Without that extra stimulous she is bored to tears, as my husband was when he basically gave up on school in the second grade.
I think as a society we are becoming too sensitive, we are afraid to let our kids feel like just because that kid is in the smart class that I must be dumb. To me that seems like a great opportunity for a HUGE lesson. A lifelong lesson that goes beyond the moment that (faulty) realization occurs. Why not teach them that yes, that kid is smart in a particular way, and you have your own amazing gifts and we are going to find them and focus on them. Or that (depending on the program) they can work very hard at school and maybe get in to the program next year. That not everything is fair, not everyone is born smartest, prettiest, thinest, etc. That everyone has their own special gifts that can be explored and developed in a variety of settings, not just the "gifted and talented" program.
My daughter has her own challenges...she wants to be a ballerina when she grows up, but honestly (and I have not and would not say this to her) she has very little natural grace and coordination. She is going to run in to not being the girl that gets the lead in the recital, not getting advanced to the next level, etc. etc. We will cross that bridge when we come to it, and hopefully she will have the self confidence to continue to enjoy ballet if she chooses without feeling like she has to be the best or the most beautiful for it to be valuable to her life.
Obviously your comments, Wendy, strike a nerve with many parents.
John Holt's books How Children Fail and How Children Learn also provide a fresh perspective on schooling.
Although John Holt later promoted homeschooling, his writings should not be dismissed by those for whom homeschooling is not an option, as they provide fantastic insight and strategies for enhancing your own children's ability to learn.
As a former teacher, I have found that "GAT," "Special Education," or "TESOL" all boil down to one thing: GOOD TEACHING! They all employ similar teaching methods. In a perfect world all of these students would be able to grow and thrive in the same classroom. I am convinced that an "average" student would benefit from a "GAT" class just as much as the the "above-average." Unfortunately, our outdated expectations of what an educational classroom looks like keep us from moving forward. Wouldn't it be nice to involve ALL children in an enviroment where they can have the same opportunities to think!
I came from a school where they eliminated all the advanced programs to get rid of the stigma. It resulted in even more children being bored and getting worse grades.
I think there are no easy answers.
Excellent points! This is a very difficult topic for many reasons. But I don't think eliminating gifted programs is the answer. I know that I would have lost all interest in school without them. The Extended Learning Program was started in our district because gifted students would cruise through school and then hit a difficult subject in high school and give up. Because everything had come so easy before, they would shut down when faced with a challenge.
What we need to teach all kids (and many adults) is that one person's achievement in no way diminishes your own. One person's A does not make the B you slaved for any less of an achievement. Our gifted program tended to squash more egos than build it because it showed kids they were small fish in a bigger pond.
It comes down to the individual child on whether or not a gifted program is suitable for them. But the needs of gifted children need to be met too.
Children that are struggling to catch up to the standard are given special attention to promote their educational growth. Why do you think it isn't fair that schools also try and promote growth and challenges to children that are above that standard. I have two children in school right now. My fifth grader is above average in every area and is bored to death because his teacher can not go above and beyond with him one on one (which is what enrichment programs are for). And then my third grade daughter is struggling to stay "average". If I were to think for a second, "why couldn't my daugther be in an excellerated program" it would be total selfishness and foolishness. Kids that are excelleing in the classwork become board in the classroom and deserve attention to their needs just as much as children that struggle deserve special attention. It is the flipside to the coin. You can not promote one and ignore the other.
I just finished "Dumbing Down America" by Charles Sykes, and, though I didn't agree with all his conclusions, he presented plenty of informtion for me to form more focused opinions on education. His theme is: emphasize academic achievement, and then will come self-esteem. He criticizes the education system of the last 50 years for spending too much time trying to falsely build up kids' confidences, while neglecting the thing that does that automatically: teaching children to master tasks and acquire knowledge. Judging from your comments, I think you would like this one. I know I'm going to look into your recommendation as I continue to figure out this schooling thing for my own family.
I have a 4-1/2 year old, so we're not dealing with issues like Gifted and Talented as yet, so please read the following as a question from someone coming from a place of complete and utter ignorance, as opposed to being a loaded question (which it's not):
I've heard a lot of negativity around G&T programs, but I'm not sure what their difference is from the "Honours" or "Advanced Placement" programs we had back when I was in school, and around which I heard very little criticism. Is the negativity a result of a newer belief that honours and advanced placement courses are patently flawed, or is there something new and inherently bad about G&T programs, as compared to the honours and AP programs of the late eighties-early nineties?
I'd love to hear some thoughts. Thanks!
K.
Just speaking from my own 1980s experience, I think the talented and gifted programs we've been discussing are in the elementary schools, and honors and AP programs (or IB, at a couple of schools in Portland) are in high schools.
I think you're right that there is a lot less negative energy expended toward the high school-age programs, and I'm just guessing, but I think that, besides the different ages at issue, the high school programs are largely self-selecting, and the grade school programs are often based on IQ tests.
My kids were invited to join the gifted and talented programs where we are. Our program was simply extra work. I opted not to have my kids join.
We chose to have them do fun things instead, an art class of their choice. One chose guitar and the other chose bass guitar. They had more fun with that than they ever could have in g.a.t.e.
I agree with you about the labeling. Some kids that should be in were overlooked for a variety of reasons. Some of the brightest kids in my sons class were overlooked because they were so bored they didnt do well in school. Funny, they only wanted the well behaved with the grades to show. It is sad how dysfunctional our district is.
Our school district refers to the accelerated program (a far better term in my opinion) as the "Gifted & Talented Program". I actually phoned the school district administrative office and expressed my concerns with calling it "gifted" and "talented" and was blown off essentially. In fact, they were quite offended that I would have the "audacity" to say anything. However, I do not regret saying what I did at all. If there were a campaign against such terms, I'd be on it :)
You people do not get it.."there is nothing more unequal then the equal treatment of unequals."
Thomas Jefferson
Listen there are gifted kids dying in classrooms because repitition is endless. No they are not the same and the problem with America lately is that medicority has become the norm. Sad.
I've come to question gifted and talented. I used to be in the program during early grade school(2-5th grade) and was dropped for some unexplained reason. Now, several years later, I'm a junior in high school. My grades are higher than almost all of the "gifted and talented" kids, and my ACT score is also higher than most I have asked. Can somebody please explain why we are pumping thousands of dollars into a program that allows kids to "fufill their excelled educational needs", when most of these "gifted" kids are full of themselves and lazy. The best part is, the irony that comes with how limited one who isn't "gifted" is in what they do. During middle school, one could only be a part of the mock trial group if they were in gate, which I was not. Now that I'm showing interest in law and all of that, I've been set aside on the team roster because I'm "unexperienced". This seems very fair. Is it smarter to be sharp and a hard worker, or to simply claim to be better than most students. I will avoid going into a rant and end the comment here by asking: What really makes a student gifted and talented?
Post a Comment
<< Home