There's a consulting group, the DMC, that is infiltrating hundreds of school districts across the US offering expensive consulting services. It's all about academic return on investment, which is defined as how many students pass the state tests. Gifted students are already proficient so according to them, it's a waste of money to spend money on special programming. Here's what one of the leaders of this group says about g/t programs.
"Budget debates sometimes include the all-too-common refrain, “Mr. Smith strongly supports this program, so we can’t get rid of it” or “The teachers really like this program.” These considerations are not irrelevant to decision-making — especially since teachers might like certain programs because
they feel they help students. But, relying solely on such arguments does not serve students or the budget well.
Anecdotal evidence can be far off the mark, as it often confuses correlation and causation. Some programs, like Gifted and Talented, seem very successful because so many students in these
programs have high grades and test scores and matriculate to college at high rates. But many gifted students are likely to succeed regardless of such programs. The key is to figure out which programs contribute to student success; instinct
is usually not enough. In a world of tight resources, persistent achievement gaps, and rising expectations, a rigorous
system of academic return on investment (A-ROI) is a powerful lever to make the wisest use of limited funds."
https://secure.ccsd.net/internal/cm...mnt-council-calculating-academic-roi.pdf
