[-]Suggestions for dd 6th birthday party in NYC. Looking for either whole class or just the girls. UES would be nice. Thanks!
5 replies [ Reply | Watch | Options ]-
[-]I have done a lot of reading now on giftedness and gifted education. It really is a special needs issue. Why are people so hostile about this?
96 replies [ Reply | Watch | Options ]Because so often it's not true giftedness. The kids in gifted programs tend to be the prepped children of upper middle class or middle class parents--they don't need the special programs.
[ Reply | Options ]well, but isn't that just sour grapes. there may be quite a few actual gifted kids in these programs. not all, but many. the vehemence against gifted education seems to come from bitterness i think.
[ Reply | Options ]OR: I don't think so. I'm a middle school teacher, and many of my students are former gifted students re-entering the mainstream after gifted elementary programs. As students, they are often indistinguishable from their less gifted peers--and this is after 6 years of having so many additional resources.
[ Reply | Options ]-
Only what I learned about it in graduate school. As I said, most often what is argued about on this board is not true giftedness. (BTW, no sour grapes here: my kids are going to school outside the city and did not apply to gifted programs.)
[ Reply | Options ]no one really knows how many kids are actually gifted in these programs. so repeating that they are not over and over just starts to sound like bitterness or envy. why say this if you don't really know.
[ Reply | Options ]I told you what I do know: in my experience as a teacher, my formerly gifted students are no more accomplished than their non-gifted peers--and this is after 6 years of "special" education. What is bitter or envious about that?
[ Reply | Options ]All the more reason that G&T Programs (as opposed to, say, Anderson, which has higher requirements and standards, from everything I've read in reliable sources like insideschools.org) need to be given more leeway to beef up their curriculum so that gifted students can achieve their potential and develop the skills they are equipped to handle but aren't being taught because of either woefully inadequate teaching or a bar that's not set high enough. I am dismayed at your outlook as a teacher to dismiss students as "not gifted" because as adolescents in your non-gifted school they are not showing skills. They're probably bored to tears in your class and not trying because that's what adolescents do when they're not motivated by their teacher o...
[ Reply | Options ]It's certainly possible that they're bored (although I believe I'm an excellent teacher and have the track record to show it), but these kids are going to have to cope with the mainstream at some point--life will not bend over backward just for them (and when I have 140+ students, I don't have time to customize lessons for everyone much as I would like to). If gifted education at the elementary level doesn't give these kids some coping skills, then what is the point?
[ Reply | Options ]np: You are all over the place. You originally stated that the kids you see in your classes coming from G&Ts aren't gifted (except when in your capable hands because you're such an accomplished teacher) and now your concern is they're not able to cope? What is it? Not smart or can't cope? Your track record is what? Students with good grades? Good test scores? If they came from gifted programs they already had those? What do you accomplish with these students that you have to be proud of since you feel they can't survive after having you as a teacher because they don't have "coping" skills?
[ Reply | Options ]
np. my dc tested as gifted and i agree with the teacher. it's pretty much bunk. testing a 4 y/o with flawed tests not meant to be used on dcs that age and expecting it to mean anything is silly. the dcs who are doing division in their heads at that age are obviously gifted. the ones who scored 99x3 on the erbs and their moms say, gosh, i had noooo idea! probably aren't.
[ Reply | Options ]I agree that not all are gifted, but we really have no idea how many are. so why keep repeating it?
[ Reply | Options ]Well.....we have a hugely underfunded program spending a lot of money on students who probably aren't receiving any benefit from it. Why wouldn't you want to repeat that?
[ Reply | Options ]because you denigrate the kids who are there and need it. also, the testing at least indicates that the kids most likely to make use of it at age 4-5 are getting it.
[ Reply | Options ]NNP: How is the DOE spending a lot of money in gifted programs? They get funded the same as other schools/programs. It's not taking any money away from gen ed kids. And, since you brought up your dc, I'll bring up mine who tested gifted at 4 yo and still is in middle school.
[ Reply | Options ]
If the 99x3 kids generally aren't gifted (according to you), I guess the 95s must be idiots.
[ Reply | Options ]lol! exactly. posters like this one who have an agenda, keep on saying this over and over with absolutely no real data
[ Reply | Options ]Not all the kids in GTs are truly gifted. But they're overall pretty bright. Most of them are good at school. Most of them can go faster than other kids. No extra money is spent on them - not one penny. So why, other than competitiveness, begrudge them being grouped togetehr so they can go a bit faster and get less bored? Who is hurt?
[ Reply | Options ]Labels or no labels, I would prefer my child to be among other bright, inquisitive kids vs. a class that includes dc who are lagging grade levels behind. It's a more exciting environment and more conducive to building a love of learning. Whether or not they average out in middle school, it will have built a good foundation.
[ Reply | Options ]ITA! these people who don't think G&T programs should exist are mostly bitter people who scream no fair everytime anyone gets anything good. I am sick of this menatlity in public. No one can have anything worth having because they feel it takes from someone else by just existing. it really is sick and out of control.
[ Reply | Options ]i'm not op and i'm not bitter. dc got into a g&t. and i'm not begrudging the dcs who test in. but what about the gifted dcs who don't test in? the fact is, the test is very flawed. some gifted dcs get in, some don't and some who get in aren't gifted. if it's going to truly be a program for gifted dcs, the procedure for identifying them should be improved. i vote for testing later.
[ Reply | Options ]testing later will not solve this problem. the programs need to serve the kids who can focus, answer questions and show their stuff from early on. I think the programs should be expanded more later to include kids who were not enriched early on, but who prove to be gifted at a later age. that would be better.
[ Reply | Options ]
no one said 99x3 dcs generally aren't gifted. quit twisting my words. as for 95s being idiots, it's arguable that some are brighter than those who score 99s. the tests are flawed and the dcs are too young for the results to be meaningful. that's my point. i'm not envious and i'm not angry. dc is going to a g&t in the fall.
[ Reply | Options ]^^btw, no one but the nyc boe says dcs who score 90 on the olsat are gifted. fine to give them a spot, but then don't call the program a gifted program. say it's for reasonably bright dcs.
[ Reply | Options ]Most truly gifted dc's - not pg, but truly gifted -really need a special program. They don't just need it in third grade.They need it in K, 1, 2 and 3. The purpose of gifted programs is to help kids who would otherwise founder and have problems in a mainstream class. If you throw those kids back into the mainstream classes, you havent solved the problem at all. Why is this a solution? Honestly, the biggest problem is not the kids who are not identified, or even the kids who are misidentified, but that the programs don't offer enough enrichment or acceleration. There isn't enough expertise in teh system for gifted education, and once parents get into a gifted program, they feel they've won the lottery, and they never question anything or dem...
[ Reply | Options ]i disagree about gifted dcs needing an accelerating k program. i think this is a natural assumption on the part of entitled nyc parents, but i don't think it's necessarily true. as for your contention that the program isn't as good as it could be, i don't disagree, but this is nyc public education. the scarce dollars have to be spent where they will do the most good for the most dcs. gifted dcs will do fine in a not-perfect g&t program or even a mainstream program, particularly if parents do the extra work to make sure they get enrichment outside the classroom.
[ Reply | Options ]Honestly, this is not true, not every child benefits from G&T. Especially if your dc has competitive nature, he or she may have hard time not being one of the smart ones in class. And in spite of what this board seems to believe there is a range of abilities in the G&T classes, and some kids do struggle there and may have well been much better off in gen ed.
[ Reply | Options ]of course there's no way to ensure a dc who tests well at 4 years old is truly a genius. i'm not suggesting that or demanding perfection. i do think there may be a way to make it better and more fair to all. as it stands it's a way for rich white dcs to have an advantage, whether they are truly gifted or not (a 90 is not). the changes to the process this year don't seem to have made a difference on that score.
[ Reply | Options ]the test gives an unfair advantage to dcs with well-off, well-educated parents. testing all dcs doesn't change that. however, if you waited to test for g&t, not only would it be more apparent who was really gifted, it might give disadvantaged dcs more of an opportunity at enrichment. we need to strengthen head start programs and work on other outreach to these dcs imo. we also need to make gen eds better in general in poorer neighborhoods.
[ Reply | Options ]many white, enriched kids did not get a decent spot this year. the smart kids got the best programs. sorry you cannot accept that. you fight for the disenfranchised only because you are pissed the system didn't work for your dc, and you don't want others to have anything if you can't. of course, fighting only for yourself would not fly, so you take up the cause. no system is perfect, but this one is about as fair as it gets. agree about outreach and headstart, but that is a separate issue. would also like to see expansion of existing G&Ts to accomodate kids who are more likely to test in later. otherwise, i like the system.
[ Reply | Options ]if you've bothered to read the thread, you would see that the system did work for me. dc is headed to a g&t in the fall. instead you choose to jump to conclusions. as for citywides, i have heard that anderson has plenty of umc dcs of color, particularly asians, but nothing about whether disadvantaged dcs are represented. have heard nothing about nest. tag is obviously a different story. the argument that district g&ts serve their community ignores the fact that many districts don't have g&ts or their g&ts are being taken away.
[ Reply | Options ]I think anderson and nest are diverse this year. I am not sure about class, but it seems to be a mix from the people I know. tag is more mixed as well, but largely from the nearby community. G&Ts in white nabes tend to be white, and in AA/H nabes AA/H. Asian G&Ts as well.. disadvantaged kids need to be helped way before they get to this process...
[ Reply | Options ]Re the claim that we can't expect GT programs to be better because dollars are scarce: It doesn't take money to make them better. It takes expertise in gifted education, creativity, and commitment. If you have a gifted kid, and he's not coming home every day excited about what he learned, either you don't have a gifted child, or he's not in a program / class that's really gifted.
[ Reply | Options ]I think Anderson works well for some kids, perhaps most kids, but there are some kids for whom it doesn't work. You'll know within a few months (if that long) which category your kid is in. if it doesn't seem to be working for your child the way it's working for other children, I would not assume, regardless of what you are told, that it will get better. Your kid should be excited about something she learned every day, because that is what gifted kids are like when they're learning.
[ Reply | Options ]
I agree. Plus many "gifted" kids also have a learning disability. For example I have a"gifted" level IQ. But I also have earning disabilities such as not being able to remember random sets of numbers. I can't remember phone numbers to save my life. A lot of my life is learning to work with what I have and have not.
[ Reply | Options ]
could it be an overinflated "gifted"? what I mean is is that the focus is on autism, ADD, Asperger's etc so when a teacher sees a true "normal" child, they can be thinking "oh wow this kid is gifted? We were asked to have our child tested for the gifted program but we declined-we just think he is a normal bright child.
[ Reply | Options ]actually, they have no additional resources, they are given the same mediocre curriculum as the gen ed students (at least at my dcs school) and the same idiotic tests. I am not saying my children are gifted or not, but they are smart and the school does little to "enrich" them
[ Reply | Options ]My DH was in a gifted program 35 years ago or so. He started the program in 2nd grade in the 1st year the program began in his school district. However, it only went to 8th grade... after that it was back to regular school for his high school. He definitely suffered being put back into general ed. Major social anxieties that took several years for him to overcome. Not to mention he had already covered all the material already. (i.e. completed Calculus in 5th grade)
[ Reply | Options ]
-
What about special needs kids? Do you think its fair that we pay for their theapy? Why is this okay but when kids from the other side of the spectrum get services people have a problem with this?
[ Reply | Options ]Oh g-d you again....the reason that paying for therapy is necessary is because with it you get productive citizens and without it you get people who need help from the state. Paying for therapy for kids with disability makes simple economic sense. Now stop picking on the most vulnerable of our kids. You sound meaner than a snake when you do so.
[ Reply | Options ]And you sound ignorant. So going by what you say it is conversely true that paying for more challenging curriculums for kids that need it help to keep those students engaged and staying in school. I have heard way too many times about kids dropping out of school because they were bored to tears. These kids are vulnerable too. You sound dumber than a door knob with your reasoning (or lack of).
[ Reply | Options ]Wow. What a nasty woman you are--and you think the woman above is ignorant. I think she has a point.
[ Reply | Options ]np: There is no point engaging with the above poster. Nothing anyone says is ever going to make a difference, and talking to her just gives her a platform. Ignore.
[ Reply | Options ]So many people agree with me. Just look at how many people had their kids tested for G&T this year. While you may say that means nothing. It shows that people are waking up and that a one size fits all education is not the way to go. Excellence should be encouraged not mediocrity. The Gen Ed curriculum as it is now, dictates to the lowest common denominator. Kids who have learning disabilites should have special services and by the same token kids with exceptional aptitudes should be challenged and provided the resources to stay engaged.
[ Reply | Options ]NP: many more people had their kids tested for G&T because the DOE marketed it and parents are eager to avoid under-performing gen eds. The curriculum in gen ed is EXACTLY THE SAME as that in G&T, only the peer group is different, and (sometimes) the teachers/administrators are better.
[ Reply | Options ]Curriculum is not the same. I know, i have a kid at Nest. The classes are accelerated.
[ Reply | Options ]Citiwide G&Ts are accelerated and don't care much if your kid can keep up or not (especially at NEST). District G&Ts follow the gen ed curriculum but the teachers are usually able to go deeper into a topic and have an easier time to teach because the children's intellectual capabilities are pretty even.
[ Reply | Options ]
I do think kids who are accurately tested to be in the top 2-3% need accelerated curriculum, but others don't necessarily "need" gifted curriculum. However, I think people want G&T program bec gen ed programs in most areas (not the $$$$$ zoned ones, I guess) are not good enough to keep the very bright kids engaged. Or parents hope their kids should be in a class with kids who tested well/prepped kids who will behave better...
[ Reply | Options ]
praise the lord - ITA. unless you have a gifted kid, you can't remotely get it. and the parents are always ridiculed. if you have a kid on the other end of spectrum of giftedness - no one would dare criticize you for saying your kid needed a special school.
[ Reply | Options ]I have a gifted kid (accd'g to tests, teacher comments etc) and I don't agree w/OP. Gifted does not equal special needs, unless there are co-existing emotional or behavioral or physical issues.
[ Reply | Options ]It sure does. A gifted kid has a "special need" to be challenged accordingly and not left to flounder. I have heard storied about how teachers in Gen Ed use these kids to help the other kids in the class. I think that is well and good and teaches them to helpful and kind. But at the same time who is helping them?
[ Reply | Options ]
I have to confess I am hostile. I would have been considered "gifted" myself, as would many of my colleagues through the years. NY is filled with "gifted" people if you just use the criteria of above-average intelligence. To me a truly "gifted" person is an eight year old who is bored in third grade math because they're ready for calculus. Kids who are in Mensa. Otherwise, you are talking about a bright kid, which is great, but to call them "gifted" is a bit much. Every town in America has dozens of "gifted" kids in their towns. Now really, just how extraordinary can all these kids be?
[ Reply | Options ]np Gifted programs should only be for dcs scoring in at least the 98th percentile on IQ test. Offering gifted ed to kids with 90s is truly ridiculous and a waste of resources. Clearly done to make programs more diverse AND to keep middle and upper middle class whites in public school.
[ Reply | Options ]You guys can keep arguing about this left and right. Fact is that the G&T programs are a welcome addition to the NYC public school system that allows us with "bright" children to escape bad or less stellar zoned schools. There. That is the only reason why my children are in G&T programs. The "flawed" test does a good job to keep the class room on a homogeneous level and that usually results in excellent teaching. Who cares that it is called "gifted and talented?" Everybody knows this is crock. I bet even Klein does.
[ Reply | Options ]NP: You realize the fundamental problem with what your wrote, right? Why should YOUR child be entitled to an adequate education b/c based on a flawed test (which is biased against minority and poor children) he/she qualifies as "gifted" while other children are not?
[ Reply | Options ]a) the test itself is not biased against minorities or poor children - the reason why those are underrepresented in G&T programs goes way beyond this discussion and is much greater than the DOE ever can handle on its own. b) it's a lottery. if your child fits the profile that the G&T test lets through you and your child are lucky. Nothing wrong with that. Revamp the zoned publics and make sure everybody gets an equal chance on a good education you'll see the G&T can go back to its true purpose.
[ Reply | Options ]So you're OK with the public school system being flawed and inequitable, because your DC got "lucky"?
[ Reply | Options ]am I okay with it? Considering that I have 2 more kids that need to get lucky down the road I don't think so. It's something you just have to deal with. No matter if you like it or not. It's not going to change anytime soon if at all. It has been getting better over the last few years, though, and that is a good thing.
[ Reply | Options ]
No, that is EXACTLY my point above. 98th percentile is not high enough. That is still tons of kids. My kids are in that zone. So are thousands of others. I'll bet half of Scarsdale fits that bill. To me, a truly "gifted" kid is a rocket-science genius type, and I would imagine that those kinds of kids do have special educat