Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums General Discussion Responding to anti-GT remarks

My child is switching to a gifted magnet school next year. I have been running into some negative comments from my local friends about this, and I'm struggling.

I generally respond by saying that DD's school experience was not working well for her and that she was unhappy, and we think this would be a better fit. But I'm hurt and frustrated by these remarks and am searching for some polite but effective rebuttals.

A very high IQ child (say 145) an often learn academic material material several times faster than an average IQ one, so it makes sense for him or her to placed with other high IQ children so they can all be taught at an appropriate pace.

Some parents will resent the assertion that their children learn much more slowly than yours. It may well be true, and it does not mean there is anything wrong with their children.

Jealousy is a tough one. So is dealing with the NCLB egalitarian attitude, which seems morally just until you experience the downside.

Maybe you could mention this study, which seems to show that when overly broad entry criteria are used for a gifted program, kids at the cutoff get no benefit or even a slight detriment.
http://giftedissues.davidsongifted.org/BB/ubbthreads.php/topics/105328/1.html

Of course, they might come away with the idea that all gifted schooling is worthless.

I think you're doing as well as you can. I dealt with some jealousy already over a simple grade skip, and it is tough. From what I've experienced, simply talking about your child's poor academic fit may alienate some parents, who jump to the conclusion that you're saying your child is better than theirs.

That's why I think it is a problem that's impossible to solve perfectly. In order to respond to questions with a true explanation, you have to talk about your child's needs. The need for more advancement, a faster pace, different materials, etc. shows that your child is likely brighter than that of intensely questioning pushy parent X. Ducking questions will often just postpone the problem, and there's sometimes no way to duck a very pointed question.

I guess you could try saying that you agree with them to some extent, that you see a lot of problems with education in general. Commiserate. Then say that you feel very lucky that your daughter is going to get a better chance at a real education.

I often find labeling children loathsome (though I also understand how testing and identification can be vital), so I could honestly say that to such people.

I do have some residual discomfort with the fact that she will be separated out from other children. I am willing to say that, but then I don't know if that hurts or helps. I certainly also think that an ideal world, every child would learn at his/her level and there would not be a need for rigid separation, especially at this young age (DD is 7).

I don't know if it's jealousy--maybe a little, but I don't think that's the primary thing. We are very liberal and run with a very liberal and egalitarian-minded crowd. There is also a certain element of rejecting traditional measures of achievement, and definitely an anti-testing sentiment. Now my friends sound like sheep, which they aren't, but it's all of a piece with all this, IYKWIM.

I would go so far as to say, it's a problem that's impossible to solve. They are putting you in an impossible position, by trying to engage you in a debate about it, when any possible defense of the program will entail a comparison between children like yours and children like theirs. I think politely deflecting the questions is the only way to go.

I wouldn't have the right answer, but I would say something anyway. I would try to leave out the words "advanced", or "faster", or maybe even "harder". I would say this school is just to give the kids "more work". How many parents and kids really want more work? Not many. Well, some people do.
(I know. "Work smarter not harder," but describing the same darn more rigorus cirriculum as "harder", "more advanced", "faster-paced", or "more work" describes the same thing but evokes different emotions.)
And then you could say the principal gave you the choice: your kid could go to this advanced gifted school or you could violate UN child labor laws and sign a waiver allowing your six year old to sign a five year contract to be a teacher's aid. You thought it would be more like a childhood if they, you know, learnt stuff all day at school.

I'd probably go with a statement that went something like: "My DC has a learning style and processing profile that makes the average classroom a really poor fit, and X school has a program that we hope will better meet her needs." You might even add "Y professional indicated that this placement would help prevent some likely pitfalls further on." You can enthusiastically agree that you firmly believe that all children should be taught at a pace and depth that challenges and engages them without overwhelming or frustrating them - including your child. You might talk about how lucky parent or friend Z must feel having a child who fits in well in a regular class, has lots of peers who share similar interests, and for whom a straightforward traditional educational path works.

The dark side of an egalitarianism that preaches treating everyone the same is that it ignores the very real diversity of human beings and denies individual uniqueness. My husband is 6'4", muscular, and over 200 lbs. I'm 5' 3" on a tall day and less than half his weight. Give us each 2100 calories a day and I'd get fat, if I didn't throw up from overeating, while he would faint from hunger and waste away. Our meals would be the same, but it would hardly be fair. Your child happens to have a high intellectual "metabolic rate". Withholding "mental food" from such a child would be harmful, but it doesn't necessarily follow that giving the same amount of "mental food" to a child who can't digest it would be beneficial. Treating everyone fairly means treating everyone as an individual and meeting their needs as they are, not as you'd like them to be.

You could say if we didn't have a system that segregates by age to begin with and instead educated kids in multiage groups based on needs, then there wouldn't be this problem.

I did actually say something about the whole age segregation thing being artificial, too.

It's not possible to dance around the school's actual classification--"gifted magnet" is in the official name, and they all know how the system works. Cat's outta the bag.

"You thought it would be more like a childhood if they, you know, learnt stuff all day at school."

In a funny way, this does sum it up, huh? My DD would heartily agree. School makes her feel left out, as she has articulated to us.

I'm sorry you've been getting negative comments. It's hard when you are just trying to do the best you can for your kid. My son skipped 1st in our local school, to no one's suprise who knew him, and then we transferred him mid-year to a GT school out of town. We did this mainly because his needs were not being met, particulary pace and level of instruction. I have said things like, "he has special educational needs", "the new school works a year ahead, which my DS was ready for", "my DS already knew what they would be teaching at the local school", "we are moving to the GT school to avoid another skip", "we did not want our kid to get all As all the time; we wanted him to learn how to learn so he wouldn't struggle if he was challenged".

We have been lucky in that people who know us and our kid are happy that we found a better fit for him educationally, and we felt comfortable saying all those comments above.

If you do feel like getting into a conversation about whether GT education would benefit all kids, I'd say go for it. Some kinds of GT stuff -- enrichment, higher level thinking skills, grouping kids working at the same level -- can definitely benefit all kids. Things like doing 2 years of work in one year will not work for all kids. Also, grouping doesn't work so well when there's a group of one. A nice thing for schools to do would be to schedule math and reading at the same time for all grades, so kids could go to the level they need regardless of grade.