We invite you to share your experiences and to post information about advocacy, research and other gifted education issues on this free public discussion forum. CLICK HERE to Log In. Click here for the Board Rules.
The following excerpt is from "The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life" (Copyright 1994) by Richard J. Herrnstein and Charles Murray.
(Page 434) The Neglect of the Gifted Another factor in the declining capabilities of America's brightest students is that the decline occurred when, in policy circles, disadvantaged students were "in" and gifted students were "out." When the first significant aid went to secondary education at the end of the Eisenhower years, it was for the brightest students who might become scientists or engineers. In 1965, with the passage of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA), the funding priority turned 180 degrees, and it has remained anchored in the new position ever since. As of 1993, the ESEA authorized forty-six programs with budgets that added up to $8.6 billion. Most of these programs are specifically designated for students in low-income areas and students with special education needs. Even the programs that might apply to any sort of student (improvements in science and mathematics education, for example) often are worded in ways that give preference to students from low-income areas. Another set of programs are for support services. And, finally, there are programs designated for the gifted and talented. This is the way that the $8.6 billion budget broke out for fiscal 1993:
Programs for the disadvantaged 92.2% Programs that might benefit any student 5.6% Support and administration of ESEA programs 2.1% Programs for the gifted 0.1%
This breakdown omits other federal programs with large budgets aimed at the education of the disadvantaged — more than $2 billion for Head Start (funded by the Department of Health and Human Services, not the Department of Education), more than $3 billion for job training programs, plus a scattering of others.
* * *
What has changed in the past 20 years? My guess: not much.
What do we have now? By my read, we have ESEA with 1,150 pages of changes: "The legislation passed by the education committee yesterday, titled the Strengthening America’s Schools Act of 2013 (SASA), makes major changes to ESEA and seeks to build upon the 37 states plus the District of Columbia that have ESEA waivers."
The SASA changes pertaining to gifted students that are highlighted by the article are these: 1) Addresses the Excellence Gap and gifted education: Requires states to describe how they will assist school districts in identifying and serving students with gifts and talents, particularly from underserved backgrounds. 2) Establishes an equity report card: Provides data from schools in key areas such as student performance, school funding sources, high school graduation rate, participation in kindergarten, participation in advanced studies (AP, IB, gifted), school climate information, and school discipline data. 3) Supports research in gifted education: Requires the U.S. Department of Education to continue research and development in gifted education, including the establishment of a national research center and demonstration grants.
The cynic in me sees those three highlights as a whole lot of nothing. I would maybe become a believer if a highlight had described that funding for gifted education would immediately increase by 1,000% from last year's funding levels.
Though some readers here might cringe at the thought, I believe the only way to solve the problem is by forcing the law to identify gifted students as special education students. In "Section.2." of my proposed "Public Education" amendment, I use this language: "3) Students whose academic skills competency and knowledge proficiency are measured in the aggregate minimally either two years below or two years above age-appropriate-grade-level shall be designated as Special Education students and shall receive educational funding at twice the normal rate (competency and proficiency testing shall be done when requested by a teacher, parent, or student)."
