Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Parenting and Advocacy New topic

A few evenings ago, I had a brief conversation with another mom during a swim practice. She is currently attending college for an education degree and I think she is on the parent board at our zoned public elementary school. The issue of ability grouping was brought up in regards to the swim class where it seemed that some students are not advanced enough, yet somehow are in the same class with more proficient swimmers who have to stop in the lanes on a regular basis so as not to run them over. I mentioned that I am in support of ability grouping in all situations including education. She agreed which is great since she will probably be a new teacher in our district in a few years.

What she said next didn�t make a huge impression at the time because I had been aware of it for years. Afterwards, I thought about it more and have come to the conclusion that it is an unethical practice (though it hadn�t appeared to me at first glance).

She reminded me that even though the school district does not �track� children officially, the teachers and principles do so �unofficially�. I had heard this when my daughter was in public school six years ago. She was one of the �unofficially identified� gifted (high achieving, compliant, cooperative, cheerful, and confident) students.

If she were my only child, I may never have questioned this classification and assumed that the teachers were always right in their determinations and that they would �take care of her� despite the official stance. Fortunately, we also have a son who was the catalyst for the advocacy we pursued for both children. We were somewhat on the fence with our first because it was hard to come to terms with the fact that we intuitively knew better than the educators what our kids needed. We also knew that even though our son was overtly intelligent, he would not be a favored student especially considering that they would not grade advance (except for a few �connected� cases-another unethical practice) and that their curriculum for K and 1st (at least) was excruciatingly average.

I now believe that teachers are right approximately 50 percent of the time when identifying their most intelligent students. Yet they make these determinations based simply on their impressions. This school district also (unless things have changed recently) considers the group administered �intelligence test� �(multiple choice, low ceiling) as more valid than a �real� I.Q. test such as the Stanford Binet or WISC. The group test is the only official criteria for qualification for the enrichment based gifted programming.

I guess my point here is that this practice of classification is wrong even if your own child may benefit as a result. We tried to change the system for all children and failed. The �off line� advice we were given was to just advocate for your own children rather then pursue systematic change. I don�t think that would have helped us anyway as we didn�t know anyone with real influence at the time. We were forced to go private.

I admire some of the progressive public school systems in a nearby state that have very objective ways to identify gifted students. Individual I.Q. tests, grades, achievement tests, teachers and parents� opinions are all assigned specific weight. Ex. I.Q. test has the highest weight at 40%, grades and achievement are 20% each and parent and teacher recommendations are worth 10% each. Points are assigned for varying ranges within each category. So if a child scores 144-148 on the I.Q. portion, only minimal additional points in the other categories may be necessary to qualify for gifted programs. Of course they should also consider other types of accommodation as well.

I believe that the less defined methods of identification (such as our public school system uses) are very subjective, archaic, suspicious and contentious in comparison. I don�t understand why they don�t adopt the well developed models from these other highly regarded school districts.

Do any of you have strong opinions on this topic? Where do your school districts fall on this continuum?

I have strong opinions about individualized education, for all children. And yes, I would agree with you that more formalized ways to assess and place children would better serve them all. I have difficulty with placing profoundly disabled children in an all inclusive setting, where their needs are not adequately met. It makes no sense to do the same to children at the other end. Schools with special ed programs that really work do a good job at assessment and educational planning/implementation. They set appropriate goals and know what interventions to use to meet those goals for the children identified with special needs. Quite frankly, I think that system should be in place for all children. But I guess that's asking too much of the educational system.
I live in IL - one of the lowest ranked states on the special education continuum. Three guesses where they rank gifted education (and the first two guesses don't count!).

I didn't know that IL is ranked low for Special Ed also. That is too bad. Why are our property taxes so high?

Are you planning a trip to Springfield on the 18th of April?

For anyone interested in the state of gifted in IL

www.iagcgifted.org/CHILDRENBEHIND.html,

With all the testing that goes on in schools you would think they could test the kids in the beginning of the year and put them in classes based on subject knowledge and ability/needs. I realize some kids do much better with a lot of stucture while some need the opposite. I have decided to home school because I don't want my son placed in an artificial box because he was born on a certain day. I am confused by the fact that we know that our educational system ranks very low in the world yet we do nothing to change it. If it was business, then the government would subsidize studies and retool from the ground up. It seems to me that is what we need in schools!

Educating our children to the maximum extent possible for each seems like such an obvious answer to ensure the continued prosperity of our nation. Unfortunately, it seems like more of a turf war on the part of the educational administrators who represent the system against the independent educational psychologists who represent the individual students.

Maybe in answer to my own question about where do all our tax dollars go; doesn�t it seem that the administrative staffs are at least twice as big as they were a decade ago? Example, we have a superintendent and an assistant superintendent (in addition to an administrative staff) for a district of 6 schools. Each of these schools just gained an assistant principle as well!

My ds is still too young for school, but I know a ton of teachers. The funny thing about administrative and other non teaching staff. They have TONS of people on staff trying to force kids to conform to some crazy concept of what children should be like at a certain age. If they spent that same amount of money actually investing in alternative education situations (some ability grouping classes, some age based, some special schedules, a mix) they could give kids better education outcomes.
I have a friend who taught behaviorally challenged kids - she would have some kids with their own para assigned to them. Okay, maybe the traditional classroom isn't the best thing for these kids. Maybe pay that para to work with them in their home or some other setting.
They refuse to be creative or allow the needs of the child to be the guide. It is all about force fitting kids into a mold "Little Johnny - you are a square, because the hole you need to go into is round, we will saw off your sharpe edges until we can force you into your proper place". Little Johnny replies - "but why can't I go into that square over there?". School "because your birthday is Sept 5, the cut off for the squares is Sept 1st." So a school counselro, a school psychologist, a social worker, and a para all spend months sawing, sanding, and grinding away at little Johnny. In the end - he is not longer a true square, but not quite a circle either, so he doesn't fit anyway. But you know who gets the blame - his parents!!

snip -
Maybe in answer to my own question about where do all our tax dollars go; doesn�t it seem that the administrative staffs are at least twice as big as they were a decade ago? Example, we have a superintendent and an assistant superintendent (in addition to an administrative staff) for a district of 6 schools. Each of these schools just gained an assistant principle as well!
-snip

Ouch! That sounds like a harsh generalization.

As for Identification - it's a tricky subject. Personally I strongly feel that the best way is for students to be able to move fluidly from subject to subject. That way if a child is best suited for advanced Math at a normal pace, she could take a regular Math class with older kids. If a child needs a fast paced math, she could take Math with Mr. Z who teachs it really fast.

In other words, let the kids self select into classes that suit them, with some thoughful guidance. Maybe the teachers would sit down and interview each kid at the begining so that they would set appropriate goals and measures of success. So that the child could change groups if one was too hard, too fast, too slow, etc. Maybe we'll call it the Goldilocks Approach?

That will mean more inservices on the social and emotional needs of Gifted Kids. Honestly, before my son, I thought that the only difference between gifted kids and regular kids was that gifted kids were smarter. Not that they had different learning and environmental needs. Not the affect of asynchronous development. Things were easier for me in that I had watched my son slowly develop for his whole life, but when the bottom came, I got a crash course! I'm so grateful for the Davidsons being a crutial resource in that.

STBmom - sorry your son missed the cutoff. Ouch!

Love and More Love,
Trinity

I mentioned awhile back that I worked as a long term sub for Special Ed. I actually worked with the �behavioral� crowd primarily. SOME of these kids were incredibly insightful and intelligent. For the most part they either had challenging home lives or now that I think of it, maybe some were just bored out of their skulls in the regular classroom and others were just dirt poor. I couldn�t figure out why some were even in the classroom. If I were a teacher, I�d prefer working with the gifted and/or LD or �behavioral�. Of course flexibility (and patience) is key for any of these groups! -Although as they say, "Common sense isn't all that common."

I have a friend who is a teacher. She asked me for my "bottom line" on what could change at schools based on my "new insights." I told her that I wished that every child with "behavioral" symptoms in the classroom could be an individually given IQ/Achievement test to look for kids who are acting out from boredom or LD plus gifted frustration. When you subbed, Delbows, did you have access to the children's files? Was testing done on the "insightful and intelligent" ones? Did you see any trends?

Love and More Love,
Trinity

No, no and no. This experience was right after college graduation, wedding, and temp relocation (do to husband's career) to an area where I was lucky to find any work since I didn�t speak Spanish.
I really do mean some of these kids were dirt poor. They came to school early to bathe in the bathrooms (because they didn�t have running water at their homes). The case histories I got (oral) were from the school principle and classroom aides. The most challenging child tried to stab me with a pencil everyday. I was told that he was born addicted to drugs and that he lived with his elderly grandmother because both parents were in prison. I�m sorry to say that I don�t believe that I made a positive difference in the five months that I worked with him. Hopefully, the Special Ed teacher that they finally recruited was more successful.
Gifted Ed wasn�t on my radar at the time, but I often think about one boy in particular whom I had an excellent rapport. His father was a migrant farm worker. He had acted out in his regular class previous to my arrival, so he was sentenced to my room for math everyday (to do his regular class work). I don�t think he minded leaving his class and he didn�t need much assistance from me. Some of the teachers were of the opinion that he was a future ditch digger though. I think they were wrong and I hope he�s doing well.


Diana