Quote you:
�I think kids who's talents like in music or athletics or easily measurable academics get plenty of support. And the kids at the other end get their needs supported.
Quote me:
What else should the advanced kids do with their whole school day, tutor other kids? �Look for trouble? �Read and doodle? �I'm going to send homework to school with my son and tell him I'll grade it when he gets home.
So obviously I disagree. �I offered to Get the easily measurable academics proof of talent (ie IQ testing) and was told by the GT person that the public school would probably never be able meet the needs of a kid who's too talented. �I'm sure they're wrong because what does my kid really need anyway? �But "they" (globally) �most certainly do not provide plenty of support to kids who are gifted in �easily measured academics. �Please don't feel attacked. �I'm not being argumentative. �
I do like how this article condensed and distilled all the widely circulated research and most current popular beliefs about gifted issues. �I think they did narrow it down to this:
This debate can be formulated in terms of at least two rival views of what gifted education should lead to: self-actualization versus eminence....
I think personally I would like to see an effort made to give gifted individuals and gifted families more of a free reign self-determined IEP, but, within the system. � I see why they don't. �Unchallenged academically gifted kids are more likely to lift the averages, but those that don't tend to leave the system. �Allowing gifted familys to try their own things might cause failures among the ones who sparkle up the graded curve. �Rumor has it they'd mess up the budget by costing local schools some funding if they fail too. �
So, Cathy A. �I agree that the eminence focus minimizes the gifted child's personhood. �But I also think it's a bunch of words and wonder how the semantics will play out in real world policies. �
Anyway, it seems to me that the article was trying to plant the seeds of public opinion that we need to get policies in place that allow academically talented kids to receive a free and appropriate education in public schools. �In other words �they called it developing talent into eminence so that the public would not be scared and hesitant to offer a drastically different education to a "more child" (reference a blogger that pointed out that intense gifted kids are normal, they're just more of everything normal. �They often lack moderation in everything by nature.) �The public doesn't understand that an academically talented kid wants more on a different scale. �At the same time, they're normal kids. �They need parenting and teaching and coaching and pushing and guiding.
