giving end-of-chapter quizzes BEFORE the chapter starts, and then substituting differentiated work for them if they already know what is being taught.
This sounds great and I'm aware of parents who were delighted to be told this. Once the practice was implemented, they found that it translated to no change in curriculum and pacing for their child. Parents may need to ask what is meant by "if they already know what is being taught". For example, if the student scores 90% on the pretest, would they...
... be allowed to move on, taking the pretest for the next topic?
... receive instruction in the area representing the 10% they did not know?
... receive curriculum compacting?
... or receive no change in curriculum/pacing because they did not demonstrate 100% mastery?
A roundup of some thoughts to consider:
- While gifted children may learn very quickly and have areas of great interest in which they have tremendous depth of knowledge and understanding, they have not necessarily studied the material in advance to prep for a pretest (as a hothoused child may have).
-
At the end of a unit, or the end of the school year, would the teacher/school/program allow a typical child who obtained 90% on the final exam to move on to the next topic, or would the typical student receive remedial teaching until achieving a score of 100%?- Parents may wish to look for philosophical consistency in how the teacher/school/program deems that a student "knows" the material.
While teachers/schools/programs may vary widely, there may be some which knowingly or as an unanticipated side effect of other educational practices strip gifted children of their internal motivation. This has been discussed recently in other threads. The accumulated effect after several years can be devastating to the social/emotional well-being of the child and the whole family.
Requiring a gifted child to
choose between appropriately advanced work and social inclusion with classmates, and offering pretests which may require
100% mastery are some of the ways in which a teacher/school/program can tout offering gifted differentiation
* while
in actuality the student may never access differentiation in instruction, curriculum, pacing, or grouping with intellectual peers.
While such practices may be staunchly defended by some as a means for institutions to close the achievement gap or narrow the excellence gap, practices which invalidate the gifted and/or cap the achievement of top pupils do not serve our society well.
* differentiation... see roundup of
buzzwords.
