Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Learning Environments Would you move a child b/c of curriculum mismatch?

I do think this is true (we've done 4 years of Singapore). But Singapore does do the "good" stuff EM does, like plenty of open ended problems that require multiple steps and thinking outside the box. Not necessarily 100's of cookie cutter problems. It is short on the drilling as well. We do additional multiplication/division practice.

A lot of the time, when people discuss EM, they are comparing apples and oranges. I have 2 teacher friends whose districts use Em and they implement it quite differently from what my district does and very, very differently from another friend's district. One complaint I read on EM is that the conceptual leaps are readily obvious to adults but not to kids. So that makes me wonder if HG+ kids do make those conceptual leaps that more avg kids don't make with the program. I agree the pace was much too slow for my son.

EM is similar to Sm in some ways but SM does not spiral the way EM does. EM is similar to Rightstart (which is now being used in several schools in the US after branching out of the homeschool market) which is very effective. Again, though it doesn't work w/ every kid and some parents aren't effective in teaching it.

Just to update -- here's our plan for now:

Based on the more recent testing dd#2 had, her WAIS (achievement scores) were in the 98th and 99th percentile (total) for math, reading, and writing. I am a bit skeptical on how the psych input the data I have to admit b/c I asked her for age based norms as well as grade based (end of 3rd since she took the test the week after she finished 3rd). Both the age based and grade based norms were identical for every subtest and the totals on each of the three tests in terms of percentiles and that seems very unlikely to me given that she is very young for grade.

The WISC scores left me confused from the 2nd testing b/c her GAI was 148 a year ago and 127 this time -- both will qualify her for gifted programming combined with the WAIS scores, though. I just don't think that her perceptual reasoning subtest dropped from the 99th percentile to the 75th with no explaination other than "actual fluctuation in abilities," which is what the report says. Her verbal subtest was in the 99.7th the first time and 99th this time which seems like a reasonable fluctuation.

All of that aside, if we move her to school #2 (the one closer to home that tracks to the middle school she'll attend), the classes will have about 20 kids, but the GT programming (which she will qualify for) will consist of the GT coordinator (who is split btwn three schools) coming in maybe once/week to work with her and other kids in the class and her being in a within class grouping of like ability kids. I'm not sure how many like ability kids they are going to get in the grade with two classes of 20, though.

If we keep her at her current school, I am almost certain that she'll qualify for the one hr/day TAG pull-out for reading. Dd#1 was in that class for a year in 4th grade before she skipped and moved to middle school. It wasn't totally adequate for dd#1, but she was much more advanced in terms of reading and writing in 4th grade than dd#2 is. They do use Caeser's English, learn Greek and Latin word roots, and write poetry as well as doing small book groups as I recall. It is better than what she'd get at school#2 in terms of literacy. I am pretty sure that this is what we are going to do -- keep her at the current school.

For math, I have signed her up through Melmichigan's EPGY hs group and plan to approach her teacher (with whom I have a good relationship) about using this as a supplement at school hopefully rather than just piling more on her at home.

There are two kids they are subject accelerating for math which they claim is based on 98-99th percentile scores on MAPS, CSAP (NCLB tests), and the quantitative and nonverbal portions of the CogAT. However, these kids were accelerated last year prior to the CSAP and CogAT scores, so I guess that they were just using MAPS. Dd does have two scores in that range on perceptual/visual spatial/math related tests -- a 98th total math on the WAIS and a 99th total perceptual reasoning on the first administration of the WISC-IV. However, since her MAPS scores have been all over the place (btwn 56th to 95th percentile on the MAPS -- varying btwn the 20th to 99th percentile on the same subtests every time she takes it), her CogAT scores were not that high, and the perceptual reasoning score also wasn't the last time she took the WISC, I'm thinking that I am going to be fighting an uphill battle to try to get her subject accelerated in math.

As her mom, I can honestly say that math is innately her strongest area. My biggest worry here is that her self-image re math was totally crushed last year. Her teacher was convinced that math was her weaker area and convinced dd as well. Dd now hates math and her MAPS scores came out lower at the end of 3rd than they did the end of 2nd. Actually, her scores dropped something like 20 pts (and 40 percentiles) from the end of 2nd to the late fall of 3rd when they retested. The high scores from 2nd were, of course, due to "good guessing" -- just like her IQ scores.

Sorry -- yes, I meant the WIAT-II, which was co-normed with the WISC-IV, I understand. Dd's WIAT scores are significantly higher than would be expected given the IQ scores the second time around. According the the GAI chart, if they were that far below her GAI, it would be considered a learning disability. Her WIAT composite scores varied from 5 to 14 pts higher (depending on the subtest) than would be predicted given the GAI. The psych didn't find that odd, but to me it would indicate that the second test may be an underestimation of her GAI, no? The reading composite score was statistically significant to a .05 significance level and the math and writing subtest differences were significant to .01.

Dd's bd is in late Sept, a few days before October, so she will be turning nine more than a month after she starts 4th grade. I, too, expected the #s to be somewhat higher using age norms as a result.

Me too. I did email the psych and asked her (in a polite manner) if she was sure about the age norms being identical to the grade norms. She said that she input the #s into the computer and it did all of the figuring, so she was sure it was right. I guess that it doesn't matter hugely unless she is significantly less or more able than we are assuming right now.

In re to accelerating her for math, I don't know if it is the right solution. I do know, however, that the curriculum thus far has been a very bad fit for her in math and her confidence has been hugely shaken as a result, so we need to do something different in terms of math. I am sure that she'll at least get placed in the 4th grade accelerated class, but that class does the identical curriculum but moves through it faster. I don't think that is a good idea for her. I'd, honestly, rather have her stay in the std classroom for math and get pulled out once a week to work on the EPGY stuff or be given the opportunity to independently work on the EPGY stuff once/week. That's what they did with my older dd when she was in that class, but they used some fairly weak enrichment activities (like suduko puzzles) when she was pulled out weekly.

As far as her IQ/GAI, it was 99.9 the first time and 96th the second. I, too, imagine that it falls somewhere in btwn the two, but we don't have the $ to retest again in a year. eta: she had a lot of 18s the first time she was tested (raw scores), and one 19 and a 17 in verbal the second time, but her PRI -- where two of her 18s were the first time -- didn't have a single score higher than 12 the second time.