Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Parenting and Advocacy Montgomery Erasing Gifted Label

Looks grim


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/15/AR2008121503114.html
What about the parents and gifted students?

I don't mind. As long as my child is receiving an education appropriate to his abilities, I don't care what name they use. Also, being gifted is indeed a gift, kids didn't have to work for it, it's not an achievement. Whereas "honor student" is an achievement that kids need to work to get, and anyone (in theory) can strive to be an honor student. In this sense I totally agree that honor students, but not simply being gifted, should get recognition (oh well, in the form of a sticker).

This is what it is about, right from the horse's mouth.


I don't think its about egalitarianism, though.

I rereading the article, it appears the GT program was oversold and oversubscribed.

Most school districts could just do grade skips rather than pullouts or special programs. It would save a lot of money, too.

Our school district also does not have gifted program, it does not label anyone as gifted. This is fine as long as the kids all receive the academic challenges that they deserve. It's not the case at the present moment. The school district is going to implement "individualized instructions", we will see how it goes. I'm not very optimistic, though.

The "More" Child Blog has the response from the Board of Education about the article:

http://themorechild.wordpress.com/2008/12/16/board-of-education-issues-statement-in-response-to-washington-post-story-%e2%80%98montgomery-erasing-gifted-label%e2%80%99/


If it's about eliminating labeling in favor of a services-based model, are they going to experiment with getting rid of the special needs label too? I doubt it and there would probably be a huge outcry (and rightly so) if that happened. I worry that this is a step towards eliminating and/or reducing what are already limited services for gifted.

This sounds good, in theory, and is exactly how I would run all schools if I were 'in charge' of this sort of thing. I would also provide several different 'pace options' for each subject in each level.

The next step would be to try to 'uncouple' various subjects, so that a kid who is ready for Algebra, but not developmentally ready to memorize their times tables can spend some time in Algebra 1 and some time in a 'memorization skills' class that focuses on math facts. Same with Reading/writing/handwritting and Spelling. That way everyone could be challenged on all fronts, and not only would the gifted lable wither away, but so would most of the 2E lables, except for needed accomidations.

Then I would make the whole process totally opaque, so that an interested parent could have their child do an online learning session that confirms that the child is well placed. A version of the tests that the teachers use to assess the child's level would be availible online.

Yum, Yum, Yum

Grinity

My thoughts exactly!

Labels are generally necessary in a bureacracy to get services. Do I love them? No. But they exist for a reason. Eliminate labels and you usually lose services.

I am suspicious and if I were in this school system, I would be making some noise about it.

Good to know. Thanks, MON.

I guess I just wouldn't want this to become a trend. Not yet. In a perfect world, labels wouldn't be necessary and all children would be taught what they're ready for precisely when they're ready for it.

But we don't live in anything close to a perfect world, especially not for GT children...

A similar thing is happening in our district with the junior high school, where they are doing away with separating kids for honors courses. Everybody can take the advanced courses and, from what I hear, the classes are watered down because kids are struggling with them that would learn better in a more normally-paced class. Labels are unfortunately sometimes necessary, especially in big school districts. It's hard to get anything done outside of the norm without a special ed label. If Montgomery is anti-label and pro-individual needs, why continue to label and group kids on the basis of their chronological age? Why not have kids grouped according to ability for each subject regardless of age, including gym? I doubt that Montgomery County will able to follow the one-room school model

[/quote]This sounds good, in theory, and is exactly how I would run all schools if I were 'in charge' of this sort of thing. I would also provide several different 'pace options' for each subject in each level.

The next step would be to try to 'uncouple' various subjects, so that a kid who is ready for Algebra, but not developmentally ready to memorize their times tables can spend some time in Algebra 1 and some time in a 'memorization skills' class that focuses on math facts. Same with Reading/writing/handwritting and Spelling. That way everyone could be challenged on all fronts, and not only would the gifted lable wither away, but so would most of the 2E lables, except for needed accomidations.

Then I would make the whole process totally opaque, so that an interested parent could have their child do an online learning session that confirms that the child is well placed. A version of the tests that the teachers use to assess the child's level would be availible online.

Grinity[/quote]

This sounds wonderful ideal for every child. Let me know when you're running for person 'in charge' - I'll be sure to vote for you

I'll cast my vote your way, too, Grinity!

That gets my vote too! Please add true accountability to your platform so parents don't have to waste so much time and effort pushing on a string.

I don't have any idea what accountability would look like in this situation, so please inky, say more. I do like what Dottie's School System has with their Arbitrations System.

No matter what the system, we have humans planning and administrating those systems. So if the teachers who are doing the placement testing are only given tests with ceilings that work for 95% of kids then 5% of kids won't be properly placed. This is the kind of thing that I hear about here over and over, so that's one reason why, when I visit schools, I stuff that magic cotton in my ears, and ignore all the great sounding promises that the administration says, and only look at teachers in action in the classrooms, and the results of testing that the school does on my individual kid, and their proposed plan for him, subject by subject.

Maybe we'd publish a chart showing the gains made by each individual kid. There is a researcher (help! name anyone?) who says that in a system that worked, the highest acheiving students would make the most gains, and really take off, making everyone else look worse by comparison even while the average and weak students learned more than ever before. Might be great and look bad on paper....

Grinity

Unfortunately I know more about what it doesn't look like than what it would look like. Accountability has been on my mind with the erroneous MAPs testing data at DD's school and what I see as a lack of accountability. For me accountability means that when mistakes are made, leaders take responsibility and action to prevent the recurrence of similar mistakes in the future.

After going through the run around of "yes, a mistake was made" but "no, we're not going to do what needs to be done" I have a better understanding of the frustration that led to No Child Left Behind being enacted. Unfortunately NCLB doesn't give the kind of accountability that's needed. Jim Trelease has a good article on his web site called "No Dentist Left Behind." Just as it wouldn't make sense to hold dentists accountable for the number of cavities their patients have, holding schools accountable for test scores does not provide true accountability.

It sounds like this is related the research you mentioned and I'd be interested in learning more. Maybe Dottie's Arbitration System is what accountability would look like, but it has a lot to do with professional ethics. If ethics is adherence to the unenforceable, we end up pushing on a string trying to get true accountability when professional ethics isn't valued in a school system.
http://www.trelease-on-reading.com/no-dentist.html

Inky,
Now I see, at least a little bit...
I wonder if you would get penalized if you called the MAP folks, told them your story, and asked them to build something into their system to prevent these kinds of errors in the future?

I spoke to the MAP people on the phone once, and they were very nice. They seem to really care about 'getting it right.'

Thanks for sharing your link! too funny/sad!
grins

I sent a letter to the district assessment coordinator asking if other schools were using the erroneous data and what type of oversight there is in determining which scores to use. I got a letter back that while they would not encourage use of the Preliminary Norms data, "the choices that schools make regarding which reports to use is a school decision." Accuracy? We don't need no stinkin' accuracy!

Here's the latest. The Gifted and Talented Association has issued an Action Alert.

http://themorechild.wordpress.com/2008/12/23/now-is-the-time-gta-issues-action-alert/

It's sad to think that w/out some kind of label, the needs of gifted kids just won't be met. There will be no accountability.

Our district is supposed to be moving to a Growth model, perhaps next year. They even stated that a child is already at the top 5th% should show growth as well. But there is no mention of how this will be determined. Certainly, the state tests won't show anything. They will have to move to out-of-level testing. But in a district w/ a no acceleration policy (yes, it has been done but A LOT of fighting was required) (subject or grade skip), I'm not sure how they will have this growth in the top percentiles unless all the parents are afterschooling or the kids are learning on their own after school hours.

Yes Dottie, I've been hoping to catch up w/ the Superintendent for a face to face discussion on this but may have to settle for email. There were several forums but none in my area close enough for me to attend.

For people interested in keeping up with developments in Montgomery County, visit http://www.gtamc.org. I'm also blogging on this regularly at http://themorechild.wordpress.com.

Why should you keep an eye on this? Because MCPS is the 16th largest school district in the country, it's located just outside the nation's capital so it's high profile, and it's regarded by many as a leader on GT issues. (I'll argue that last one...)

Switchedon,
Thanks for the updates about MCPS. If MCPS erases the gifted label, I'm sure many other school districts will follow suit. One of the important reasons to keep the label is that naming an issue is the first step to understanding causes, risk factors and putting preventive strategies in place. Not that we want to prevent giftedness of course, but we want to prevent the social and emotional problems created when their unique learning needs are not met.

I hope you will speak when the policy is submitted for public comment. Your daughter's story is compelling and I thought it would make a great "Letter to a Stranger" described here: http://www.wrightslaw.com/info/ltrs.persuade.james.htm