If gifted students — making up about the top 1-3% of students in a typical school district — are as many standard deviations above average academically as our special education students are below average, why do we not have specialized G/T classrooms in every school district in America?
Perhaps we have internalized the notion that to claim that certain children are gifted is to imply that other children do not have gifts; this therefore seems elitist and troubles our egalitarian sensitivities. We also mistakenly think that G/T classes would be somehow “better” than regular ed. classes, making the presence of gifted classes somehow unfair to the students who don’t qualify for them.
None of this could be further from the truth. “Gifted” should not be a synonym for “pleasant, hard-working student” but rather a label given to students who think and learn in dramatically different ways and at vastly faster paces than the rest of the student population. These truly gifted students — who in my opinion comprise a smaller percentage of the population than most people think — are completely underserved by the regular education classroom.
(Tangential rant about the percentage of students that qualify for G/T: “For children living in the middle-class suburbs of Washington’s metro area, odds are good they’re prodigies, at least as measured by the school systems’ gifted and talented programs. At Bethesda’s Westbrook Elementary School, for example, 87 percent of second-graders in 2006-07 were designated as eligible to take part in “gifted and talented” instruction. At the town’s Bradley Hills Elementary, 84 percent attained that status.“ Click here for the rest of that article.)
In some ways, the differentiated instruction movement has hurt gifted education, because we now believe that teachers should be able to differentiate their way into accommodating gifted students’ needs in the regular ed. classroom setting, which is false.
More on what I believe G/T education should look like in my next post.
October 6, 2009 at 11:55 pm |
[...] http://mrpullen.wordpress.com/2009/09/27/rethinking-gifted-talented-education/ [...]
October 16, 2009 at 8:58 pm |
Ah, I am in agreement with treating G&T students differently. My nephew who was reading on a 5th grade level fluency wise and a late 3rd grade level comprehension wise in first grade was pulled out towards the middle of the year last year. The problem was his math skills were really high too. He was adding 2 and three digit numbers in his head. His progress reports were always great but I don’t believe he was being adequately challenged.
October 21, 2009 at 10:04 pm |
As a former gifted student, I feel that in most of my classes–regular or gifted–my needs were not being met. I can remember only 3 or 4 truly stellar teachers in my K-12 life as a gifted student. Teachers who always had me engaged and thinking in new ways and with new perspectives were few and far between, and mostly confined to my secondary education. I had plenty of nice teachers that I liked in elementary, but only one stellar teacher. I think that even if you do have tracked classes (like a gifted class), many students’ needs are not being met. I think that is mostly the fault of the slow-to-change and reactionary system that is much of public education, not just teachers’ failure.
October 30, 2009 at 6:45 pm |
It was recognized as a slower learner in 1st grade but then put into a “gifted” program in 3rd grade. I felt I was more challenged in the gifted program (we were taught public speaking in 3rd grade!) and that made the difference. Students tend to rise to the expectations placed upon them. Rather than separating the faster learners, what if every class was taught like a “gifted class” in which teachers teach with the highest expectations for their students.
November 22, 2009 at 10:14 pm |
I agree that every district should have a Talented and Gifted Program (TAG). All students learn differently. Students who truly belong in a TAG program need the opportunity to explore their own learning potential in such a program. However, let’s not forget that all children at all levels should have every opportunity to reach their full potential!