Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Parenting and Advocacy How do you feel about the public school system?

Do you feel positive? Negative? Neutral? Disillusioned?

When my first child started kindergarten I was excited, and assumed the schools would do what is right for kids. Now I feel very naive. I feel like I've had to fight for everything. Getting an IEP for my child in the first place, getting both of them differentiated work (which didn't/isn't happening in the classroom to the extent it should be addressed), identifying disorders in my child. Identifying giftedness. It has all been ME. If I had sat back and done nothing, my younger kid would not have an IEP, and my older kid would not have an ADHD diagnosis (despite it being obvious). No one would have suggested acceleration or differentiated work.

What I want to know, is it like this everywhere? Are there school districts/schools that are actually good and kids get their needs met? How do you feel?

sigh... in our neck of the woods, the most discouraging aspect is that teachers are not permitted to teach outside the scope of the year's curriculum. so differentiation means "different work", rather than "appropriate work." it shocked me to the core.

hence, the homeschooling.

Even in a state with mandatory services for gifted students, the school threw up a number of roadblocks in DD's way, and it was a long, laborious process to get her into the situation she really needs.

However, for the first time, I'm actually feeling positive about public school at this stage.

I am glad to read that Dude is feeling positive. I haven't heard anything positive from anyone in a long, long time. The "good" teachers I have encountered are older and more experienced. Most importantly trained before this NCLB nonsense. Younger teachers only know the current system where they check off boxes and teach to the test. Our gifted or 2e kids are basically ALL outside those boxes so they are just simply unprepared to meet their needs. Even when needs are very apparent their hands are tied. I have a lot of teacher friends and I think they are universally frustrated. As are most parents I know. Well the informed ones who are actually involved in their kids' lives and educations anyway.

Right now our district is spending a small fortune to get DD's needs met in an out of district placement but they still can't get their heads out of the "formula" approach to education and get the heck out of the way.

Bottom line is I cannot imagine DD ever stepping foot in a public school again. If we can get her needs remediated sufficiently we will definitely be looking for a nice progressive private with a "meet the kids where they are" approach. I think the "better" school districts may be more responsive to individual needs but it doesn't mean their hands aren't tied. I really wonder if the one-size-fits-all approach works for anyone. By the end of last year most of DD's friends were coming home from school crying, or crying themselves to sleep at night or even in one case on home bound tutoring because of anxiety. Really second grade should not be that way. It really, truly shouldn't.

I think it is hard for most parents on here to be fair judges of public school systems because we have such unusual children.

While every kid is entitled to free and appropriate education, figuring what that means in a statistical outlier is difficult when you consider that kids are developmental moving targets. As soon as you think you have their issues identified and a plan in place, they grow and mature and outgrow old problems and develop new ones.

I don't mean to sound like the system should be off the hook for our kids. I just meant the system could be great for the vast majority of children and we'd never know it because it wasn't created with outliers in mind.

There is a very good school district nearby that many parents love. However, I have heard from 2E parents that they are very rigid and difficult to work with.

That's an excellent point.

What I have found most distressing is the level of callousness and inertia, though. I've become so cynical that even mediocre educators (just looking objectively at WHAT they are doing relative to what I know from my own background in education) seem to "shine" in comparison with most of the shenanigans that go on in curriculum and instruction these days. Teachers aren't really "teachers" anymore. They are "content delivery specialists."

Well, that doesn't say much about what happens when a child needs different CONTENT, though, does it? Which goes a long way to explaining why teachers resent and fear inquisitive and bright children more than they ever have before (and it was never awesome, let's face it). A mirroring effect can be observed in meetings with school administrators-- bright and inquisitive parents are not seen as "helpful partners" but as PROBLEMS to be "solved" or "eliminated."

Yes, I'm cynical to the core at this point. I'm also exhausted after over 8y of this happy horse-puckey. My dad was a person who had a colorful and profane quip for every occasion, and I find myself channeling him when a system is so messed up that it seems unrecoverable--so I have an increasing itch to SHOUT at school administrators "Don't tell me it's raining!!" for whatever that is worth.

I'm also not alone. I know VERY few parents of recent high school graduates that have anything positive to say at all about public education. Educators, yes-- mixed bag. I have my gold star list there, as well. Many of them are no longer in the profession, however, and I find that alone to be very telling.




I cannot wait to be quit of this in June. Can.not.WAIT. I loathe my dd's school. There are some fine teachers there, but frankly, the world would be a better place if a 900-year-old alien who lives in a blue phone box would appear and send Pearson and all of its many subsidiaries into an alternate dimension. (Yes, I know-- but a girl can dream...) Heck, I'd settle for a Dalek invasion if David Tennant is busy. LOL.

I have a generally dim view of the US K-16 education system as a whole. IMO, it rests on flawed philosophies. As an example, how much can you expect from a system that defines a highly qualified teacher as someone who has a BA in any subject, has passed a test, and has a certification? See information here. I see these requirements as being the minimum, not the gold standard implied by the term highly qualified.

Another huge problem pushed by our schools (and others) is the fantasy that anyone can become president/a scientist/whatever. This inclusive philosophy sounds nice, but the reality is that classes end up being watered down in the name of accessibility while students get pushed into going to college. Many end up in remedial courses there and lose income while incurring debt. Nearly half don't graduate. Many of the ones who do have degrees in fluffy subjects like liberal studies (this is NOT the same as a liberal arts college) or business or journalism that don't 1) teach them much or 2) get them jobs. Unless you count service jobs or security jobs as a good use of your pricey BA. All in the name of phony equity.

Then there is the multibillion dollar multiple choice test industry. They generally test factoids and encourage a superficial approach to learning.

Okay, I have to stop now...but I could go on.

The whole thing about content delievery--yep. If a kid does something and it's not the way the teacher's manual says, they are wrong. Last night I asked my 6 yo if he ever participates in class. He said that they were doing math and the teacher asked them about "strategies" for finding the missing number on a math mountain or pyramid. The problem was 8 at the top of the mountain, 6 on the bottom on one of the sides (the corner of the triangle). How do you find the other corner? DS said he raised his hand and said "take the 8, subtract the 6, and you get the other number 2. Easy Peezy Lemon Squeezy!" Teacher said "No, DS, it has to be a strategy." What? I don't think DS is going to be raising his hand much from now on. I felt like telling him if he wants to take a nap, that's Ok. (this is a kid who is now learning long division at home and is asked innane questions about how to solve 6+___ = 8 in school, and then told he is wrong and isn't using the right strategy when he says to take 8-6!

Here's another question. Do schools care about kids? I mean in general, not individual teachers (which i'm sure some of them do).

I am sufficiently unimpressed that I'm working outside the existing system to create a private gifted school for my son (now just 2). It's already obvious that his needs will go unmet; I shudder to think of how my son would fare in a mainstream kindergarten given that he already seems to know what most 4-5 y/olds are expected to know curriculum-wise.

My husband and I both had inadequate support in the public school system.

I think the notion of a strong public school system is noble, and necessary for a strong, well-functioning country, but that our educational establishment's concept of "cohort" is what sours the experience for anyone far from the mean. I would love to see ability-based groupings, not age-groups, for all students. That, to me, is the only realistic way to ensure that all students' needs are met, at all points along the ability continuum.

Here, no. You get the odd teacher or principal who is invested in students, but most seem to be paper-pushing automatons who are more concerned with gaining union seniority than teaching.

I don't say this to paint all teachers badly. There are many committed members of the teaching profession who are outstanding at what they do and who make children's lives better every day by their work. However, in my province, the qualified keep getting muzzled by the greedy near-retirees who want to keep new blood and new ideas out of the profession. Cronyism at its worst, from the top down.

Happily, this works in my favour starting a school because it will allow me to attract the most motivated, innovative teachers of the bunch.

ETA: I attended a private high school, and the messaging couldn't have been more different than in the public system. Each student was treated as a valuable legacy. I can only think of one or two teachers who weren't exceptional in their knowledge, commitment to maintaining a high standard, or dedication to students on a personal level. Most of the teaching staff *volunteered* time to run extra-curricular activities. I think that speaks volumes.

I just had a conversation with DD's principal about this. More on the Difficult Teacher thread.

In theory they will all say that they do. I mean people tend to enter teaching with noble intentions. They love children. They want to make a difference. Then they get caught up in minutia and lose sight of their real purpose. Education gets lost and they focus on the rubric, the protocol, the strategies. Unfortunately this approach will only work with kids who have the most basic of needs. A kid from an uneducated household without the supports in place may do ok in this environment. Once again the kids from this forum, no probably not.

Oh and DH is a professor. Over the years many of his colleagues have made clear that education majors are very sincere and they tend to be "nice" kids. However they are also the least bright. In other words the lowest common denominator may also be at work in the selection process concerning who enters the profession to begin with.

Who said that "Education" is about kids? That's like saying that a souffle is about eggs.



(I'd love to put a winking smiley in here, but I'm feeling too enraged and disgusted this morning to do that.)

Extremely negative. My background: I attended public schools K-12. I worked almost 10 years in public schools, about 7 years in private schools (I have worked part time with one foot in each system). Public schools have only gotten worse. I have no hope for public schools. The entire system needs to be obliterated. I am not kidding.

Here are my issues as a former employee:
1. The states in which I worked, I was forced to be a part of the teacher's union. When I first started, I was a huge supporter of the union. Within just a couple of years, I saw the thieving that took place in my particular system, the physical bullying when I attempted to stay beyond my contacted hours to assist students, and the generally us vs. them (union vs. administrators and kids) attitude that was encouraged by union leaders. Save for 1 district that I worked in, the union couldn't have been more unprofessional. And I worked in schools in every imaginable district, rich, poor, homogeneous, etc.

2. Very poor quality teacher training. I went to a "prestigious" college with a teacher certification program. It was touted as being on of the best. The quality was so poor, it was really unbelievable. Since, in my opinion, there are so few good teachers out there (I would give it a ballpark figure of maybe 10%), you can't find any decent mentors for student teachers. The bulk of what was taught was classroom management. This was about 20 years ago and from what I hear it's taken a drastic turn for the worse...because now they focus on classroom management with the goal of getting students to master the standardized tests.

3. Fifty+ years ago, teaching was considered a worthy, honorable profession. (This will be controversial - I know.) When women were not allowed or encouraged to be professionals such as doctors, lawyers, etc., there were many more really bright and capable elementary school female teachers. Talented women were encouraged to be teachers, paralegals and nurses. As these women were able to enter and succeed in more male oriented, lucrative positions, I think there has been a brain drain. And men are just not attracted to elementary school positions - it's never going to happen. (I think if teachers were paid a lot more, then the talented women would come back. But I don't expect it to happen any time soon.)

4. Anti-intellectual attitude found in public schools. Every school that I have worked in (except for 1) has had active disdain for gifted children. Sure you may have a teacher here or there who understands and who is interested in educating gifted children. But since (in my opinion) there are extremely few gifted adults working in public schools, there is no understanding of gifted children's traits or needs. I have heard so many horrible things said about gifted children.

5. Drive to create and implement federal standards. So, IMO, there has been a brain drain among public school teachers. Now when you couple that with a drive to introduce federal standards - the effect being that you are required even LESS to think and be creative about teaching goals - because they've all been laid out for you - you don't even have to look at your children in your class to figure out what they really need.

6. The testing insanity will finally cause the system to implode, hopefully.

Now, from my parental viewpoint - this is how I have come to view and utilize public school for my son. (I need to give credit to my DH, who has always told me that public education is "useless" for any child who is even moderately above average...and I spent so many years wondering why he always said that.) As a parent, we use public school to socialize and for "anthropological" experiences. My son goes in the mornings to see his friends, to have fun riding the bus, to experience group music class, use the art materials, have access to a full size gym and to have lunch around a very big table with lots of friends and laughing. My son also learns about how an institution works at stifling any creativity and how it churns out a product using streamlined methods. He has also learned that at 7 years old, he is far more creative and intelligent than many of his teachers.

We've only got another 1.5 years total in public school. Doubtful we will make it that long.

I can't say I'm disillusioned about the public school system, because that would mean I actually had illusions about it in the first place, and my mother taught me better than that.

For our particular school, I am reasonably positive. They have done many, many things for DS and are doing fine with DD. And we have taxed their ingenuity to great lengths, in some cases. The elementary school staff went out of their way (quite literally, hundreds of miles) to obtain training and knowledge that would help them to help DS in all of his 2E-ness. I don't see that happening with the middle school/high school, but we're still doing ok this year. So far, so good.

For American public schools in general, I don't see it going anywhere but downhill, and steadily. It is only getting worse as each succeeding generation of teachers and administrators comes up, having been educated themselves in the system that is failing. Steadily declining expectations, a society built around the fear of being sued for something, a culture built around the derision of intelligence, all run by increasing quantities of technology that make it unnecessary for anyone to know how anything works or how to do anything without it, these are a prescription for disaster.

Absolutely some of the teachers care. I know some teachers who have actually fostered neglected children. There are some angel teachers out there.

I think schools as an institution don't care one bit about children. They care about jobs and the movement of children along an assembly line.

... and I'm about to.

Now dealing with a dismissive, power-tripping teacher that has less than no interest in her STUDENTS in a class that my daughter MUST have to graduate. An unweighted class in which the grading is so incomprehensible and seemingly capricious that it poses a serious risk to her in terms of scholarship awards this year.

This teacher is wrapping herself in a mantle of professional alphabet soup and titles, and is ignoring the fact that not one, but TWO subject experts that my DD's been consulting with, have declared her grading and commentary to be nonsensical, overly harsh, or even just plain WRONG.



Well, that's the thing, isn't it? I've been horrified by it at this point, and I'm probably the most difficult person on earth to SHOCK about this industry/profession/environment.

It's gotten bad. REALLY bad.

I used to think that people who wanted to Holt the entire system were crazy right-wing wackos. I still think that. But I'm starting to agree that the system that we have NOW, in 2013, is worthy of precisely that sentiment. The corporate players who are calling most of the shots in school C&I need to be nuked, for a start. While Common Core was a great set of ideas, it's never going to work with teachers who are mere automatons, and that's exactly what we have when they are punished for deviations from "the script" (and they are)... and as long as "C&I/assessment specialists" are writing the material for classroom use, rather than people who, you know, actually work every day with STUDENTS who are real human beings, this is going nowhere good.

Many families may be pleased with their children's education and we hear this frequently from families with kids in the middle, athletes, moderately gifted, and hothoused high achieving. They are incredulous that families with HG+ kids are disappointed with the very school system they adore. In summary, schools are built for mass-production but have difficulty with customization.

Yes, because they're designed to take advantage of economies of scale. That model breaks when dealing with outliers.

Also, there's the human element. In my DD's case, the educators all saw each other as trained and experienced experts in education and child development. When they looked across the table, they did not see two people with doctorate degrees in DD-ology. Had they viewed us as a qualified partner with unique information that they required to adequately serve DD, things would have been smoother.

In their defense... much like we've all dealt with educators who are woefully unqualified to do the job, the schools have dealt with scores of parents who are woefully unqualified for theirs.

DS2's music teacher won my heart on day one with a statement to the effect of, "I am merely a music facilitator. You are all your children's most important teacher, and you have a deeper knowledge of your child's needs than I have."

Bingo. Let's clone her!

This leads me to the questions I've been pondering recently. Can and/or will public school be able to serve my ds? I'm just not sure.

Also, if the answer is no or not well; what is plan b??

YES.

Yes, whenever I display "displeasure" to other parents in the district, I get looks of confusion (unless it is other parents of special needs kids). And I end up feeling that I must be unreasonable to be so unhappy. I would estimate that 90 percent of the parents in the district are happy. The other 10 percent who are not happy, the district would prefer to sweep under the rug. Most of those 90 percent of parents have probably never had to deal with the administration or had a serious concern.
But even with those 90 percent, is the district really meeting their needs? Or are they just faking it well and parents are clueless?

See Dude's observation for an explanation of perhaps 20-60% of that "happy" cohort.

JMO-- and it's a jaded one at this point.

Another factor that comes into how the PS system is designed and works is that - they groom people for all kinds of futures because society needs the blue collar worker, the janitor, the burger flipper, the garbage man etc (several thousands of these) in addition to rock star CEOs, Presidents and scientists who win Nobels (we need very few of these). After pondering a lot on this, my theory is that the outliers are expected to help themselves using their innate talents and the system grooms people who are below average, average and above average to move on and fit into society's hierarchy. When you see the system working, you can get the feel that they educate the majority of kids to be mediocre (which is what the society wants) and the effort being put into the education is also mediocre. I dealt with a "cream of the crop" PS in california and the attitude of their star administrators and their star teachers were mostly of the kind "I am a public servant, don't expect too much out of me".
Sorry for the cynicism, I am now dealing with a private school and the attitude difference towards education is stark - you will never catch this school playing a Disney movie during rainy day recess (as my son's PS was bound to do).

I don't really have one opinion of "the public school system." It's too large of an entity. Even within one district--even within one school--my children's experiences have varied dramatically from year to year. I feel lucky that we have the gifted magnet and recognize ou good fortune there.

DS5 has a very good teacher there who is going WAY out of her way for him without us having done much to make that happen. I believe she is truly passionate about making sure he learns at school. I am deeply touched by her devotion to meeting my child's needs.

I do feel that people expect a great deal--sometimes too much. I am sympathetic to the teachers' situation. I do not envy them. I do blame the test-crazed culture and also the constant "You have to do this, you have to do that" and "New rule, new rule!" nonsense for a lot of the problematic culture.

As to many/most people being happy--I think this is true, but some of this is congitive dissnonance. It's uncomfortable being unhappy and dissatisifed. It's like how everyone hates Congress but thinks their personal representatives are okay. Everyone thinks schools are failing as a whole but rates their own school as pretty good. If they thought it was terrible, but left their children there and did nothing--well, what does that say about them?

Where we are, public or private, the schools do not have any services for 2E... if a child has (ex.) sensory processing issues, but has advanced comprehension, they are out of luck until either comprehension drops to meet the SPD or the SPD goes away. We were told that our DD is SO smart that when she decides not to be dysgraphic, she will indeed not be dysgraphic! It is SO archaic here.

I agree completely. It's why I only answered the question with regard to how I feel it's servicing my specific DD's needs at this specific time. My response could change tomorrow.

The high school I attended would have, in NCLB days, been rated a failure. Yet except for my horrendous physics/calculus teacher, I received a high-quality education there. Based on that experience, I don't see any value in even rating public education at an institutional level, because individual outcomes will be so... individual.

I appreciate your balanced view. It can be tough to maintain that degree of open-mindedness.

I think as a whole, it's not feasible to expect it to serve every child efficiently and effectively. Children are not factory-farmed creatures and yet it seems that design is what our public schools mirror. Add to that the very real problem of poverty and the culture of disengagement and despair that poverty can sometimes create, and the ridiculous expectation that public education and specifically, teachers, make that all go away by the time it's time to test them, well, it's a wonder anything gets done.

I have to say, though, I have been very happy with the education my ds11 and ds24 received. I'll talk about ds11 for brevity's sake, though both were identified as gifted in the same school system. Ds's kindergarten teacher was the one to identify him for the gifted program despite the fact he was/is such a good kid that often his behavior is the foremost thing a person notices about him. He's had excellent teachers most of whom did a fair job of offering challenge and encouragement. When, last year, I went to the school system with more information from the Explore test, they were supportive and proactive, offering to test him further. They were also supportive regarding acceleration. They are also proactive in trying to identify as many gifted kids as they can and they recognize that it may be harder to identify kids from low SES, but they're still there. The teachers in our system are highly educated and dedicated and if the state doesn't chase them all away, my child has a good chance of continuing on in a successful way.

Is is perfect? No. It's not Davidson, which seems to be a dream for the gifted population. However, I don't expect it to be and I'm trying to supplement at home whenever and however I can.

One thing I would love to see is administrators allowing teachers to teach, less trying to teach to 24 levels in a class of 24, and less lowering of expectations.

The principal of my son's former school once raised her voice with me in the school lobby and said, "WE are education PROFESSIONALS." I was flabbergasted. I wish I would have responded, "I have an M.Ed. in Educational Leadership just like you do. I ALSO have a Ph.D. in DS." Instead, I left before things got too heated and made sure the signature block in my summary e-mail included both my current position at the local university and my degree. She responded much more nicely to me after that. . .

The number one requirement for us in selecting DS' new school was whether or not the front office staff, teachers, and administrators smiled and gave warm and genuine greetings to students and parents. We visited on several occasions at different times of the day to get a good sense of how inviting schools were. If we got courteous but cold welcomes or if many of the children seemed unhappy, we stayed as far away as possible. For now at least, we think we've found a good fit, regardless of school grade and availability of gifted programming (although they do have both part time pull out and full time gifted classes).

i'm so sad to hear this kind of thing is so pervasive. we had a version of this last year, too - albeit in a private school. "her classroom teachers know her better than you do." sigh.

Three cheers for HK

The current public school system is what happens when liberals and conservatives both get their way: a mediocre, everyone-is-the-same, community curriculum that is tested to death and big business is the only winner.

I feel the same. It seems clear to me that a lot of things need to change in the public school system as a whole, but it's impossible for me to judge based on my experiences. Right now, I am thrilled that the MN public school system offers open enrollment, so my child can go to any school as long as there is room. This has created happy islands of magnet programs, where like-minded children (I guess they're not really misfit toys) can be challenged and learn with agemates. We have been very lucky to find such an island within reasonable driving distance for our DS. The teachers there have been given more flexibility in designing curriculum, and it makes all the difference. (Hey, they let the teachers teach!)

Ask me next year, when my DS's HG program ends. I'm sure my view will be much darker.

I am in NZ and our system is very homogenous throughout the country. Honestly I think it is a good system for the 68% between -/+ 1SD when there are no other problems. It is not good for the 10 to 20% who our so called tail, and it is not goodfor the top 5% but even for them it is free from a lot of the problems complained about on this and other boards.

Sorry to be so negative on this topic. I used to tell my husband that I went through a mourning period when I realized that the public school system that I had loved as a child was actually dead and had no hope of being resurrected.

What makes me particularly frustrated and upset is my son's nosedive with regard to his attitude to school and the adults in it. He went on a 15 minute diatribe the other day after I asked him if he wanted to learn about something. He screamed at me, "I don't want to LEARN about anything. Learning is the worst thing in the world and I hope that nobody on the planet ever has to learn anything ever. Learning is so horrible!"

I started to laugh. I thought that he was kidding because all DS loves to do is learn. Then I asked him what learning means. He said, "learning is what you do in school when you have to sit there all day and learn things that you already know. Learning is sitting and being bored and listening to grown ups talk about the most boring things and then they ignore you all day." His school environment is not allowing him to learn. And as administrators and teachers have told me many times, they are focused on the "high" Common Core standards and making sure that everyone passes the test. The teachers have no choice but to follow their CC aligned curriculum, the administrators have no choice but to enforce the teachers' following it. Everyone is focused on the test scores and bringing the bottom up. Any teacher with the means and the brains have left, by and large. So my son, and many other children who are merely above average are being held hostage in this nutty environment.

We're having a good experience with our local public school district right now. My DSs have started in the highly academically gifted program and it seems to be a good fit. Would have been even better if academically gifted services started in a meaningful way before third grade.

It may be that my children are only MG by the standards of this board. (Haven't done extensive testing, had 99 CogAt and 96+ ITBS to enroll in program.) However, we are quite happy to finally have them in a school program that seems to be at about the right level for them.

Wow! So sad that your little child is so frustrated by his learning environment. I mourn the loss of a good education system along with you. I have seen the idiotic common core frenzy around here too. And the "training" going on to shore up test scores and the pointless parent workshops and "community education booths" the school districts run in all the local Fall festivals to teach the masses about common core standards.
It looks like it is a multi-year implementation program in California. I hope it is not the case in your area.
Good luck to your child and I hope he can get better learning afterschool than from school.

It is possible that cluster grouping by readiness and ability, rather than chronological age, would help facilitate learning... benefitting both the students and teachers?

I am so sorry to hear this. Might it be possible to share an electronic or print copy of the research article in the thread called "New research article on 2e gifted students", with the local school or news media, to raise awareness? (link- http://giftedissues.davidsongifted....search_article_on_2e_gif.html#Post172507)

and
You see what I see.

The world would be a better place with more people like you! How to get people excited about the differences one person can make, in touching others' lives?

I completely agree with the earlier comments about getting rid of the current system.

We live in what should be a great school district. It has the highest percentage of parents with doctorates (mostly MDs and PhDs in our case, but JDs also count in the census data) in the country. And precisely because they do see some very bright kids, they have very rigid rules for keeping them in line. To the point of prohibiting kids from checking above-grade-level books out of the library.

Parents with average kids seem happy. Many parents with above average kids are not, but are afraid to criticize anything less there be reprisals. There are some teachers that are worse than others, and you never see the most connected parents (i.e., school board members, PTA officers) end up with their kids in those classes.

The one merit of NCLB is that it is shutting down unionized schools and replacing them with either something better, at least on average. The problem is that the shutdown criteria don't adjust for inputs, and so are too easy for schools with good raw material, so for those of us in moderate-to-good neighborhoods, all we see is the wasteful effort that goes into gaming the tests. But NCLB, for all its flaws, is making a difference in inner cities.

It's a pity centrists gave up on vouchers. They would speed up reform dramatically. So would eliminating lotteries at charter schools. If markets were allowed to work, they could get us a lot closer to a solution.

This would just trigger a watering-down of Master's programs. The demand is too great for supply... especially when the financial reward is so far below what Master's holders can earn in other fields.


The market is in control at the university level, and that's not going well.

Like literature, theatre, and history?

I doubt this. Here, most of our inner-city charter schools are doing even less than babysitting-- some were just shut down because they weren't even providing lunch regularly. Far less can they actually educate anyone. It looks remarkably like a wild-west scenario, with poorly regulated schools siphoning off money and then leaving the students poorly served.

I agree, DeeDee, and truly-- I wanted to like the model for vouchers/charter schools. I really, really, REALLY did.

I just don't believe that the majority of charters are anything more than for-profit money-making schemes at this point.

There is good and bad everywhere. Just as a negative experience with a few teachers or gifted kids is best not generalized to all teachers, or gifted kids, the greed evident in some charters may best not be generalized to all charters.

In casting a wider net to seek examples beyond our own personal experiences, some may wish to look at the organization greatschools which gathers and provides basic information on many schools, including public and charters. Greatschools also maintains a collection of articles which range in topic from gifted ed... to questions to ask and what to observe to ensure a good "fit"... to what to do when the teacher is a bully.

There are also many books featuring schools which may be role models and provide inspiration for what is possible. Here is one such book, there are many others featured on the same amazon page http://www.amazon.com/No-Excuses-Lessons-High-Performing-High-Poverty/dp/0891950907/

Some charters have high graduation rates, and high rates of students going on to post-secondary education.

While schools often stimulate competition among students as a means of keeping children striving to constantly improve their personal best, and tout this as great real-world experience, it seems ironic that some may not believe that same sense of competition among various educational institutions may keep the institutions striving to constantly improve themselves.

I feel great about dd's TAG school. It is seriously wonderful.
The neighborhood school my ds was going to was nice. Pleasant teachers and principal, gave me what I asked for when I asked for it for ds, nice grounds, good families there. However, when a charter opened up nearby, we ran to it. His current class has 14 children, a full time teacher and a full time TA. They don't have the same kinds of resources that the public school has but they do so much more with the children.

I feel good about the public schools in my middle class town.

I am so sorry for your child's negative experience. Yet I am so relieved that he could pinpoint and articulate his disappointment, and feel safe in expressing these deep negative feelings to you. The next phase after awareness and outrage may be apathy and underachievement. You may wish to rescue kiddo before further damage occurs from his non-learning environment.

Many kids love to learn, and begin to loathe school when they correctly observe the school actively or passively thwarting learning.

Many believe that focusing on encouraging the love of learning will naturally bring up performance and test results;
Paradoxically focusing on bringing up test results may wither both the love of learning and subsequent student performance.

As Dude noted on the previous page, though-- the one real-world example that we have to work from is in higher ed. It hasn't worked appreciably well there, either.

And one can definitely argue that the complicating factors associated with primary and secondary compulsory education are mostly missing from that picture, making it even simpler.


Unfortunately, market theory only works when the assumptions underlying it are valid. Those assumptions are not necessarily valid here-- that is, that those who start charter schools are MOST concerned with quality as a means of competing, and that they are determined to "succeed" in terms of student-as-product, not student-as-consumer.

The latter leads to the same place that it has in higher ed. Making students (as a demographic) "happy" is a very very far cry from doing a good job educating them. Not all students enjoy the process of learning, particularly when they are well accustomed to picking up trophies just for showing up.

Higher ed has adjusted with ever-more-luxurious settings for students to 'learn' in, and watering down content to make them all FEEL smart (even in remedial coursework)... and that's the regular, NPO (public or private) side of things.

The for-profit higher ed sector most resembles payday loan operations, quite frankly.

While I respect that your opinion and mine differ here, indigo, I have been inside of a charter organization (and one that is reasonably reputable, I might add) for the past decade, and what I've seen is that they are INNATELY corrupt or at least corruptible upon success. They ultimately view the enterprise as a business, and don't care any more about students than Microsoft cares about its customers. Oh, sure-- they want the money to keep rolling in, all right, but that's NOT the same thing. My own charter organization has figured out that slick marketing covers a world of sins, because it doesn't MATTER if you have high turnover in students. As long as there is a fresh crop of them, you're set. Once a charter learns this basic truth, the jig is up for quality instruction. THAT is a waste of resources; rather like McDonald's serving filet mignon and worrying about what food critics will say. Once a charter is a "success" the decay seems almost inevitable.

I also saw some of the first K-12 charter efforts in the state that I was a faculty member in over a decade ago. It's not really different than higher ed. It just isn't. The details and org charts may differ, but exactly the same pitfalls exist and for exactly the same reasons. Human beings want the easy route. Even when "easy" isn't right.

They may SAY one thing, and do something quite different, even if it isn't rational-- that's where model and theory break down.

As noted; I've really, really, really tried to view charters and vouchers as "the" solution. But I don't think that they are-- or CAN be, honestly. That model is too prone to abuses for financial gain.

My own undergrad institution was a traditional teacher's college-- yes, the majors were "nice" people, and most of them earnest and passionate about teaching. They were also a group that mostly COULDN'T HANDLE the "majors" content. Even later, as a faculty member, there was a clear, bright line between our "teaching majors" and our "majors" in my department. I'd estimate about a 20 point IQ difference between the two distributions, myself. This was in a STEM domain, too.

At least we tried to turn out students who would become competent high school science teachers. Some departmental requirements don't ask anything beyond sophomore level material of those people.

Oh, dear. I should probably ask DS11 the same question. I've heard that 15-minute diatribe (it gets longer, the older he gets) so many times.

LOL.

School grades just came out, and DD's previous institution earned a D. Greatschools.com gives it 4 stars. They feature only one user comment since 2009.

Agreed. I have taken the liberty of changing the word charter to xxxxxxx above because it may be applicable as a general statement: Some have seen doctors, dentists, schools of all types, and other institutions follow this path from success to hubris and demise.

Some have observed that the presence of a balance of competing organizations may tend to sustain the length of time of true customer-oriented (or student-orientated, patient-oriented) service. To the degree this has applied to corporations, we have had strong anti-trust legislation, preventing the amassing of money, power, and control by monoliths. Some may ask whether what is needed may be more choices, not fewer?

Exactly, Dude.

The problem with ratings sites (just in general terms) is that there are MOSTLY only two responses in "crowdsourcing" efforts like that.

1. REALLY angry people who are highly motivated for personal reasons to be negative-negative-negative (and if you look at Amazon reviews for pretty much anything, you get some idea what I'm driving at there-- a lot of the time, those reviews have NOTHING to do with the quality or suitability of a particular product, so much as the stupid assumptions of the person writing)

2. Paid shills who write such glowing commentary that it would be frankly delusional if it were real.

By the way-- OUR school URGES parents to do #2, there, going so far as to offer up suggested verbiage and links to a variety of sites to post our "reviews." Really not kidding. That has been a recent phenomenon, since Pearson's acquisition. That's the problem, though-- an appealing, successful charter WILL get gobbled up by those who see dollar signs.



How's that been workin' out?

Microsoft, Apple, Intel, and other tech companies are all for-profit companies, and the quality of their products has improved over the years. The profit motive is not inimical to serving the consumer, as you seem to think.

You raise a good point, no one source of data should be taken as definitive. For example, data may be old, institutions may be reluctant to share negative reviews out of concern for possible legal consequences, etc. Yet on balance the data you have found may raise a red flag, and encourage parents to visit the articles on choosing schools (what to observe, what to ask, what might be a good fit).

Not perfectly. But let's not miss the larger point that businesses/organizations/schools/etc tend to improve when there is competition, thereby customers/consumers/patients/students/etc have a viable choice: to leave one and choose another. N'est-ce pas?

Since smart people should read books other smart people like, one way to choose books on Amazon is to prefer books where the majority of reviewers understand the difference between a review of a book and a review of their particular bookseller.

We now return you to a discussion of government schools... might a change from grouping by chronological age, to flexible cluster grouping by readiness and ability, benefit both students and teachers?

Yes to Bostonian. Which is exactly why I love Amazon and used it as my example. I tend to look at both the recent reviews, the lowest rating reviews, and some of the three and four-star ones, which often have pro's AND con's associated.

Yelp and things like it don't (typically) encourage that much nuance. A star rating system without the commentary isn't very useful.

delete

blackcat, your state IS the one I was thinking about-- where charters have had the longest timeline for playing out.

There were "start-up" troubles right from the start in the system, but those were mostly about poor management by people who REALLY had their hearts in the right places. Then there was a golden period where things worked well administratively, and the same original players with great ideas and the purest of motivations were in charge of C&I...

and now, the endgame, with monetization being the underlying goal.

The problem with charter is that their are each their own little fiefdom. Depending on the staff and administration that is present each year, you could have a radically different experience.

I feel like our charter is doing a decent job... better than the public school at accommodating our son. The local public (with amazing ratings, according to the state) said all the right things to us, but never actually seemed to help our son in ANY fashion. It was a hot mess.

Windows 8. 'Nuff said.

Oh dear. Don't even get me started on that train wreck.

Please don't get me started on this whole conversation. I really have too much to do today before the kids come home for the weekend, especially when someone started discussing market driven higher education. Let's take the one thing that the US was doing right in education and systematically tear it down.

LOL-- even assuming that were true--

how exactly does a business model translate into education?

Most people coming at that assume that STUDENTS are customers.

Most educators will tell you that is flatly WRONG.

Taxpayers and society are your customers. Your graduates are your "product."

Students are participants in the process of generating a good product. They aren't "end-users."

^This on both counts. In my opinion, most teachers don't like smart kids and administrators view their equally smart parents as a problem.

Intelligence is not desirable or attractive to the masses.

I have held these viewpoints since I sent my three year old who could read, write and do basic math to preschool, and he was clearly despised by his teacher. It was obvious she preferred kids who would sit quietly and color not those who wanted to read to the other kids.

As for my opinion of public school, let's just say it is not positive. I will go one step further and say the same goes for my opinion of the education system as a whole. I think it used to be true that you could buy a better education through a private school. I don't think this is the case anymore.

I say this based on my observation of the education my kids have received in comparison to the education I received years ago. Times have changed, and not necessarily for the better.

The public schools are a mirror of the society in which they exist as far as I can see. In US (and UK) society it seems that scholarship and academic excellence are not valued anymore.

We've seen both good and bad public school districts.

Our daughter went to Kindergarten in local district A, had a horrible experience and was extremely bored with what they were "teaching" her. We were discouraged from talking about acceleration options and when the discouragement did not work, we were given the run around all summer until being told "NO" the week before school started.

Side trip to a private school, where one grade skip was done.

Four years later, open enrolled to local district B. Here we found a district that is willing to listen to parents and look into acceleration options. One more grade skip, add in further subject acceleration, and last year they allowed her to take 3 high school classes while still in 8th grade.

What local district B does, in my opinion, is the easiest and cheapest way to deal with HG/PG kids - accelerate them (whole-sale, or subject only, or both). If testing says they are ready for 7th grade, but the calendar says they should be going into 6th - skip them into 7th. If they're ready for Algebra and Biology in 8th grade, send them to the high school (and let them take a world language while they're there). In fact, plan for this and make sure you have high school classes first thing in the morning that advanced middle schoolers might take, and arrange for a bus to go back to the middle school after second or third period. It amazes me how many districts don't do this. If you already have a classroom where Geometry is being taught, and you have a student ready for Geometry, put their behind in a desk in that classroom. If you do enough of this, there won't even be a stigma (or at least much less of one) attached to the kids being accelerated.

In our experience there are both good and bad districts out there. We got lucky that our state allows us to open enroll out of the bad one and into a nearby good one.

--S.F.

Private schools can be less bad. Around here (Bay area, CA), public K-8 schools have short days, except on Wednesdays, when they have very short days (the kids go home after lunch). Private school buys you a school day that lasts until 3 or 3:15 every day, and no furlough days. Overall, this translates to one extra day per week compared to public schools. So they have ample time for things like art, music, science, and so on. They also have time for field trips (Alcatraz, the Beethoven museum, and a local art museum, for example).

Of course, my public school education in the 70s and 80s looked just like this.

At the same time, a lot of private schools still fall into the same bad thinking that hinders the public schools: fad mathematics, every child is gifted, rigor = more homework, and so on.

A guy who grew up around here once told DH and I not to spend more money on a smaller house in a better school district because the success of the district was due to the parents more than to supposedly exceptional schools. Now that we've lived around here for a while and now that our eldest is a bit older (13), I see what he meant.

In contrast to a few other people here, I do think it's possible to judge the US education system as a whole. This is primarily because of our consistently mediocre results on international exams like the PISA, the watering down of course content, the watering down of high school exit exams, and the high number of students who end up taking remedial classes in college. Sure, there are some good schools out there --- but there are more good parents.

My experience very much agrees with this. When open enrolling to a neighboring district for middle school, 3 of the six middle schools were "full" and not accepting out of district students. Of course, those were the three schools with the highest test scores. So my daughter ended up at one of the "failing" schools, yet she absolutely thrived while there.

From our observations, and comparing notes with friends who have kids in other schools, the curriculum, class opportunities, quality of teachers, and passion of the teachers were pretty much all the same. The biggest difference between the populations of the schools was parental involvement. At the failing schools, some parents don't even care if their kid goes to school.

--S.F.

Great points, Val.

I completely agree about parents. I am no longer paying for education for my children because they are intelligent and I am involved. Those are the factors that contribute most to their academic success.

I attended a private schools in the 80s and 90s, and my children attended private school for a few years starting in 2007. As a kid, I had half day Wednesdays where we left before lunch. We had art, music and Spanish where we not only did arts and crafts, sang and learned Spanish words but learned about art history and how to read music and about different cultures. My kids got out of school one hour early on Wednesdays but were getting a watered down education. Their art was just arts and crafts, they just sang in music class and there was no foreign language. This certainly contributed to my disillusionment.

I will say there was one year of private school for my children where they had an exceptional music teacher. This particular teacher fostered a love of music and introduced reading music. Both of my kids became interested in music after one year with this teacher and my son taught himself to play an instrument. More parent involvement and rock star teachers like this one music teacher are necessary to bolster our education system.

Yes. However, that would require such a paradigm shift in the public education system that I cannot believe it would ever happen.

That said, we saw exactly what you described in our former town's Montessori school. It worked very well, but the school was small and many people want a big school and associated amenities for their children. Thus the school struggles financially most years.

To answer the original question, I feel sad about, discouraged, confused and frustrated by the public school system. I do not, however, have personal experience with it as a parent, because it has not yet been a viable option for our PG son, even before we knew he was PG.

Montessori worked when he had an excellent primary teacher, didn't work so well when one teacher he had wasn't following the true tenets of the method. I still believe there is much about that approach that could benefit the majority of children. When we relocated last year, we were scared off by a very highly rated public school system that didn't have anything G&T until third grade. Follow being oversold a pricey private school that functions very well for within the box children, but with an administrator who could stand in for any of the Wicked Witches. Now at a private, parochial school with a fantastic principal who truly moves obstacles to help every child, from what we have seen.

My biggest concern when I reflect on our experiences so far, as well as my own in the P.S. system, is that quality and flexibility truly do come right down to the individual principal and then to the classroom teacher. Without both being very smart and dedicated, we don't get much.

I have the opposite view. The fiscal reality is that, in most of the developed world, demographic change will necessitate a shift in resources away from programs serving the young toward end-of-life support. Like it or not, the public is going to have a bitter pill to swallow in making choices about what to prioritize. Sadly, voters tend to be myopic and cut value-generating resources at the expense of consumption.

In my province in Canada, education will butt heads with our sacred cow, public healthcare. Because boomers carry the political clout, and health costs are expected to consume 70% of every dollar of public revenue in 5 years, we can read between the lines about what the priorities are. It ain't special education! Gifted public programs are being shuttered faster than you can say "inequality".

Economies of scale are needed to make ability-grouping viable, and public schools have scale in spades. Schools are averse to change when it means rallying new resources, but ability-grouping leverages pre-existing resources more efficiently to better meet the needs of all students. So while I agree it's a total paradigm shift, I believe the fiscal backstory makes disruptive change in public education necessary for its survival.

Agreed. Flexible cluster grouping by readiness and ability (rather than chronological age) places more reasonable demands on teachers for differentiated instruction while offering greater learning opportunity to students. Everyone benefits.

There is good and bad in everything. Learning the weaknesses, not to hyper focus on them as a stumbling block, but to understand where our own abilities as parents can compensate/offset/complement the education experience our children receive in any given setting, is key. Resetting our emotional compass during/after a stressful exploration of options with a school, maintaining a growth (not fixed) mindset, role-modeling resilience, striving to understand the constraints within which the opposition is operating... all provide great life lessons for our kids.

If there are "too many old people with no kids" in most public school districts, where would you have these grandparents go?

May we consider the possibility that the "old people with no kids" include boomers who, upon reflecting on their own "cookie cutter" educations, created a plethora of educational options, research, and legislation available for families today? Might we appreciate the many benefits they have provided which are ongoing?

Might these families have paid hundreds of thousands of dollars in property taxes and referenda to support the local public schools over their lifetime? Might they essentially be living in their piggy banks, their homes being their last asset? If the economy improved and there were young families with steady jobs looking to purchase existing homes at the assessed values (upon which property taxes are based), might these empty nesters be willing to sell? If you did not have "too many old people with no kids" living in your district, what demographic would live there instead, and where are they now? Do they have the financial means to purchase these homes, plus pay higher property taxes than are now levied?

Across the nation, as baby boomers retire or are downsized to face an early retirement with no pensions and 401(k) accounts which may have lost half of their value or more during the economic downturn, these grandparents may see the high risk or folly of continuing to tax at ever increasing rates for budgets which are not balanced but create ever increasing deficits for the next generation to pay. There may be wisdom to be gleaned from their financial perspective, before their fate becomes our own.

What percentage of your income are you willing to pay in taxes throughout your lifespan? When you no longer have an income, but are required to continue paying taxes, you will be paying over 100%. When one is paying out more than one is taking in, there is a budget deficit. Our government is in this situation by design; many "old people with no kids" are in this situation despite having planned differently.

Education reform, improving efficiency & efficacy, may yield longer-lasting educational benefits than increasing taxes. One example may be flexible cluster grouping by readiness and ability in each subject, rather than grouping by chronological age.

Sorry, no. From your description, she is grouped by chronological age. A pull-out group is not the same, no matter whether they call it a "cluster group" to try to sell it. This is not the same as flexible cluster grouping by readiness and ability without regard to chronological age.

There is as sharp a contrast here as there is between "differentiation" meaning "differentiated instruction" or expectation of "differentiation in work products/output", without benefit of instruction.

Cluster and differentiation are among the many buzzwords which can mean almost anything.. therefore obfuscate the educational experience... rather than providing transparency and managing expectations.

Some may emphasize the importance of asking the questions, whose answers will manage our expectations.
You may wish to find out how that may be different than what your daughter is experiencing now. Based upon your description, some questions may include - how often does the group gather? is there differentiated instruction? who leads the instruction? are children allowed/encouraged/supported/instructed to work ahead?...

Operating within the current paradigm of sorting children first by chronological age, this may not receive broad support... Teachers may be evaluated based upon student performance as an indicator of teacher efficacy, therefore some unions may preclude the grouping of students who may naturally perform better, as this may been seen to give an advantage to those teachers. This has created a teacher-centric (or union-centric) system.

Remove chronological age, sort by readiness and ability, and the process becomes student-centric.

delete

Just some things to think about...
Continuing from our previous posts earlier in this thread... Where would you have the 70% of your local population move to, who are households without school-aged children (empty-nesters, grandparents, childless couples, etc)? No matter where they live, they are in someone's public school district. Why not allow them to stay in the community which they helped to build up through their tax dollars over the years?

This sounds like a point in favor of the opposition; The 70% of your local population without school-age children who are not voting to increase tax levies, may say this.

In the scenario you indicated, as baby boomers and their echo-boom of children age, there may be a smaller number of pupils in many districts nationwide... which may often indicate the same number of tax dollars is being utilized to educate fewer pupils... therefore there are more dollars available per pupil.

There are fixed costs and variable costs. Looking at a particular district's budget, attending school board meetings, and examining your State's Department of Education data found online may be ways to identify and analyze costs.

delete

Earlier in this thread, when you mentioned having "too many old people with no kids" living in your public school district, I summarized and shared several thoughts I've become aware of, from the opposition view point who seem to match this demographic. (link- http://giftedissues.davidsongifted....o_you_feel_about_the_p.html#Post172782As)
Not knowing your district or the actual wealth of residents there, nor whether the wealth of "old people with no kids" is being drained by medical issues, I cannot further illuminate for you what the opposing view(s) may be.
Some of this cost may depend upon the teacher salary and benefit costs, also possibly the tenure and relative experience of teachers. Costs may be found in school district budgets, and at the Department of Education.
Districts may list the most dramatic potential cuts in attempt to pass a levy, and when a levy does not pass they may make other cuts which have less impact upon students. The sharing of worst case scenario is sometimes seen as a scare tactic. Again, looking at costs may prove helpful.

delete

I post this as a mom of a gifted child and also as a public school teacher. I am very grateful for the magnet program that my daughter participates in, but I do not expect it to meet every need for her. It gives her not only a wonderful foundation, but extends her and provides her such an amazing peer group. But like every child, mine is unique and no one knows her and all her interests that she wants to pursue like I do. That's where I come in. It is my job to provide her additional help where she is challenged and it is my job to enable her to pursue her interests in such a way that enhances her education and her whole being. Absolutely, the teacher can help with weaknesses and use her strengths to extend her, but a teacher is just part of the picture.

As a teacher, I can tell you that it is incredibly challenging to differentiate in current constraints. Funding has been cut so much that we have zero planning time. It is a struggle to keep our heads above water and adapt to common core standards (which I love.) I come in to work super early in the morning so that I can work on planning and paperwork, attend IEP, 504 and Student Study Team meetings. I work through recess and lunch with students, providing them extra help (be it emotional or academic).

Unless you have ever been a special education teacher it is very challenging to imagine the inherent ADD that goes along with the job. There is always something or someone requiring your attention, be it something to be done, or a student, fellow teacher, parent, aide or administrator. It is very challenging to work through the day without a quiet moment. There is literally always someone in your face at all times. I consider special education to be very similar to gifted education, just at another end of the spectrum. I adore working with my students and I love my relationships with both them and their parents.

In a perfect world teachers would have scheduled times for planning that would help them better prepare lessons that include differentiation. It would help provide us time to communicate not only with other teachers, but with you. And lastly, it would provide us with more one on one time with your children.

To be honest, I send out e-mails regularly to parents in which I tell them that their child is not doing required work and I ask them to please monitor and help ensure homework does get done at home. If a child needs additional help in understanding, we offer it. I cannot tutor a child after school with their homework simply because a parent does not. After school I turn into a mother of my own child. That's why I put my extra work in on the front end. However, most schools do offer Homework Clubs etc. to help on this. Unfortunately, most struggling students and their parents do not take advantage of it.

Education is a partnership. Public schools are not perfect and nor are many parents. You figure out what works for your family in the best interests of your child and you do it. It's not a one-way street. A little love goes a long way - in so many different ways.

In our school, when the topic of sorting all children by ability and not age has come up, there have always been 2 responses: it's racist/classist and it's not fair to the bottom performing children because they will know that they are "less than" and their self esteem will be hurt.

[i]As a teacher, I can tell you that it is incredibly challenging to differentiate in current constraints.[/i]

Yes it is, and as an educator myself, I have always supported ability grouping. Our school will not group by ability and so they continue to claim that they are differentiating when they clearly are not. Honestly, no one really wants them to differentiate anyway. It's too difficult and it's never done properly.

I wonder when it stopped because all of the schools I attended in the 70's-80's did ability grouping. They did mix up ages but only for 6th and 7th grade for some reason. With the other grades they kept the ability grouping within the grade. Homeroom teachers of course had kids of all different abilities, but the kids rotated around and went different places depending on the subject. So I was with one group of kids for math and a different group of kids for reading (I was considered advanced for reading but not for math). I never thought negatively about myself for being in a lower math group or the second lowest gym group. I don't think I thought much about it at all. In a way, it was a relief being with kids at a similar level--in gym for instance. Who wants to play sports with kids who are way more advanced?

I totally agree.

Might objections be based on the older practice of "tracking" in which students were locked in to one performance level throughout their school careers? Steady improvements in identifying/addressing LD/2e issues have enabled students to make dramatic academic gains after a breakthrough. Similarly, developments in technology have provided adaptive assessments which may aid in flexible clustering.

Ditto. Beyond anecdotes, there is research to back this up. One link here- http://www.gifted.uconn.edu/nrcgt/kulik.html, to an article titled "An Analysis of the Research on Ability Grouping: Historical and Contemporary Perspectives", authored by James A. Kulik, 1992:

I'm curious for those unhappy with the public schools, whether your school districts have a high or low percent of gifted kids. All 3 of my kids are in the gifted program (hard cutoff of 130 WISC scores, although I'm sure some parents of kids in the 128-130 range have successfully lobbied for entrance), but only one would meet DYS. Our school district has an usually large gifted population (at least 10% of the kids in each of their 3 grades are in the gifted program, with closer to 15% for my youngest).

I don't feel our school district is perfect, but we've been generally happy and they have been open to our requests. The vast majority of teachers we've had are good with differentiated instruction and have worked with our kids to address their strengths/weaknesses. Sure, there's lots of bureaucracy, but at all levels -- from teacher to principal to district-wide curriculum heads -- they clearly care about the kids and want to make things work.

But again, we're pretty much a MG family and my DYS-level kid is a pleaser and happy-go-lucky.

Some districts have quotas. For example, the top 15% of achievers will be dubbed gifted, mirroring the ethnic composition of the school population. In this example, if there are 100 kids in a grade level there will be 15 in the gifted program. If the 100 pupils in this grade level consist of five ethnicities... 20 Latin American or South American pupils, 20 Native American pupils, 20 Middle Eastern or Asian American pupils, 20 African American pupils, and 20 European American pupils, each of these five groups will be equally represented: The three highest achievers from each demographic will be chosen. While some believe this is fair/equal/equitable, both a child who cannot keep up and a child who is bored with the slow pace of gen ed may not benefit by this arrangement.

Yes, as documented in this post:

http://giftedexchange.blogspot.com/2011/07/making-numbers-come-out-right.html
Making the Numbers Come Out Right
by Laura Vanderkam
Gifted Exchange Blog
FRIDAY, JULY 01, 2011

Different IQ cutoffs for different races to achieve proportionality is racial discrimination. I oppose this, as do most Americans, according to opinion polls on racial preferences.