The higher the threshold you set for a gifted program, the more the identified children may need a different educational program, but the fewer the parents there are to support such a program. Therefore a relatively broad definition of giftedness may be politically inevitable if a gifted program is to survive.
Understood-- though in one of the top 20 largest districts in the nation, that shouldn't be so much of an issue. And from a simply financial perspective, I undertsand why they do things the way they do. Simply put, a tiered program, or one with a raised bar, would cause them problems. They couldn't use it as a Good Mommy Reward for the largely-affluent, PTA-supporting families; not to mention that it would create more work and more accountability. And for what? The gifted program as it is already fills magnet programs which skew the standardized test statistics the way the board needs them to be skewed. Not to mention that that top group tends to be higher maintenance than those kids who are brighter-than-average-but-test-well. From a purely crass and political POV, there's much to be lost and little to be gained in trying to better meet the needs of exceptionally and profoundly gifted kids. It's simply more expedient to throw them under the bus.
I completely understand why they do it. I don't much like it, but I get it.
