Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Parenting and Advocacy struggling with education philosophies/options

My b/g twins just finished 4th grade. They attend public school and are in a 4th/5th grade class that loops, i.e., the plan is for them to be in the same class with the same teachers next year. Both kids are high performers and have been on the radar of the district TAG coordinator, and we had both take the Explore test this year. Both did very well, and dd even received a 3rd place medal among 4th graders in the 5-state region administered by the local talent search, so we now have a statistical measure of their abilities.

We ran into an interesting conflict this year, and I would love to get some input as it is a topic I haven't seen discussed much here. I'll start with a little background to set the stage, and apologize in advance for the long post....

Our school: In general, our district has a strong commitment to heterogeneous classrooms, combined with a commitment to meet special needs, including TAG. My kids' current school (grades 3-5) is even more committed to the concept of classroom community, with pretty much zero tolerance for pull outs of any sort. For example, when dd had an IEP for speech, the speech therapist came to the classroom to meet with her. One benefit of this approach is that it requires inherent flexibility on the part of the teachers to meet the needs in a class of kids with a wide spectrum of abilities, and in-class differentiation is happening on a continual basis.

Gifted strategies: Much of what I read on this forum, the materials provided by the talent search, and even what I hear from our TAG coordinator, promotes moving able kids beyond grade level in academics, whether it is full grade acceleration or subject acceleration.

The problem: In the last year, these two philosophies have come sharply in conflict in our little corner of the world, and I am coming to question my priorities as we move forward with our kids' education. It all came to a head over a district-wide math pull out. Kids in grade 5 from across the district are brought together weekly for math instruction. A test is offered by invitation only to 4th graders to determine eligibility. The invitation to test came from the TAG coordinator, and we said fine, without even knowing what the purpose was. As it turns out, both kids qualify for the math pull out, and dd had the high score in the district among 4th and 5th graders (the same test is used for select 5th graders to determine math placement for 6th grade).

So this is where things come to a head: we have on the one hand the TAG coordinator clamoring to have our high-performing kids in her special math class, and on the other hand we have our special-needs-R-Us/no-pull-outs school resisting this approach. When we met with the principal she explained that we need to protect our kids - people, including district administrators (TAG coordinator?) will consider them "like rock stars" (her words, honest!) and will want to take credit for their successes.

The teacher: this teacher is very experienced K-12 in math/science and capable of differentiating to any degree. She was their teacher this past year and will be again next year. She is at the same time *totally* committed to the school philosophy, and in particular places a higher priority on cultivating "community" in her class room than pushing able kids ahead in the curriculum. She acknowledges my kids' abilities (enough to make me blush!) but also strongly feels that they are at a stage where the kids' focus is rightly placed on finding out who they are and developing independence (while still learning), rather than being encouraged (pushed?) to move ahead in the curriculum. She would argue that the field of math is sufficiently rich that one can learn in math and enjoy it without doing trig (or whatever) in 5th grade, but rather do topics that are not in the K-12 curriculum at all.... And, by the way, she is on the record for saying if my kids do the math pull out next year, she doesn't want them in her class - it will be too disruptive to the community.

The kids: They adore this teacher. Dd has never seemed more comfortable in any classroom environment than with this teacher. They generally don't complain about being bored in school (not sure how much is their personalities vs. a tribute to the school's success in executing their philosophy). They are also fiercely loyal to their school.

The parents: Both went to public schools, but then so-called "elite" schools for college/grad. school in the sciences. Now working in a (highly ranked, but not elite) state research university, we are convinced of pretty significant differences in the training/opportunities afforded by attending an elite college. Recognizing that by college the kids' will be making these choices, our intuitive strategy is to encourage the kids to position themselves so that when the time comes, all college options, including elite schools are accessible to them.

My quandary: Although this conflict between philosophies has been evident since kindergarten, we have felt that the academic stakes are low enough in elementary school that we have made the right choice so far. We could have chosen a gifted school, but there are a lot of benefits at our little urban public school that our kids wouldn't have gotten there. And somehow dd still managed to outperform 99% of 8th graders taking the Explore, not to mention all of her age-peers at the gifted school. However, I've always felt that middle school is the point where academics would come to the fore. And now we're faced with a decision (math pull out) that could have implications for their math placement in middle school.

What we did: We had a very tense meeting with teacher and principal (dh refers to that meeting as "the paddling" - he and I being paddled (figuratively) by the principal). They agreed to our demands: 1) keep kids with current teacher for 5th, 2) provide math instruction at same level as pull-out kids, 3) advocate on our behalf with middle school principal next year to ensure the placement we want.

The real question: What about middle school? This whole experience has made me question our assumptions about how they would be educated. Our principal would argue that we are setting our kids up for a competitive academic rat race rather than intellectual stimulation if we push them into "advanced" classes. And she questions how much academic stimulation they really need, suggesting music lessons, etc. Their teacher tells me to chill - she says that with kids as smart and well grounded as mine, they are well-positioned to succeed in any environment. We have choices: there are several, but the leading middle school candidates are: 1) the "rat race" neighborhood public middle school (lots of smart kids with competitive, intense parents), 2) a "progressive" private middle school (small, no grades, low student/teacher ratio, big focus on independent projects).

We have a year to decide. Much may ride on specific teachers, but I am so curious to hear from others who have pondered these issues. Or maybe it is silly even to consider anything other than demanding academic acceleration?

Woo, what an interesting post. It connects with issues we're dealing with (DS6 is with his age group although very advanced in maths; with super differentiation, but very much the odd one out - we argued for him to spend some time with much older children, met resistance, and decided not to push it) but you have an extreme case of it there!

My 2psworth would be that a bird in the hand, in the form of a teacher your kids love and a class they're happy in that can continue for another year, is worth several in the bush (in the form of an unproven pullout and uncertain knock on effects). It sounds as though your current school is unnecessarily dogmatic, but you don't have to engage with that: you just need to get the best you can for your kids. It's a pity you can't have both this class and the pullout, but it doesn't sound as though you're likely enough to get that for it to be worth arguing for...

I don't quite understand why you think your decision about the pullout may affect your children's middle school placement? Is it that the children in the pullout may have some automatic skip, whereas if you give that up, yours don't get that? Or is there more to it than that? In a remotely sane system, I would expect that by the school and you exposing your twins to appropriate maths, they'd stay with their peers in the pullout as far as prerequisites and testing went, and you'd be able to make an argument - especially if you have, or can get, in writing that they qualified for it but didn't take it up because of considerations that were mostly to do with their current school. What they'd be missing would be the fun of being with other very mathy children in the pullout. That's important in the long run, but I doubt it's important in the big picture right now.

Are they doing any maths competitions, or can you get them the chance to do them, either through the school or independently? Something like that might fill the gap.

Good luck...

PS rereading, I see that I missed the point, sorry - so you've decided to go with the school, modulo some concessions, for next year, and are wondering about middle school. There I'd say it hugely depends how good the (2) middle school is in practice. Does it really succeed in stretching its most able students - will it succeed in stretching yours? I feel passionately that mathematically able children do need to be systematically challenged in maths all the way through if they are to achieve their mathematical potential - challenges in other subjects are really no substitute, and neither IMHO [humble in this one case because there are people I respect a lot who disagree] neither is recreational maths in which one has no pressure other than what's internally generated.

This forum seems to be very focused on acceleration - I think too focused. Given current educational realities, it may be true that it's generally the best that can be done, but that does not mean that it's the best that can be envisaged. There is enormous scope for e.g. doing harder problems based on near-age-level material, which I think is likely to be better for mathematical development than doing standardly easy problems on beyond-age material; but that's only possible with a level of guidance that doesn't generally seem to be available in most schools. If you have a school available that will provide that kind of guidance and challenge, I'd take that over acceleration any day, personally.

I think your principal and teacher make a lot of sense. I also think that with math, it is definitely true that you don't HAVE to take trig at any particular point. There are plenty of interesting topics they could have explored instead-- discrete math, etc. The main question (I agree with ColinsMum pretty much I guess) is whether they're being challenged enough.

I like the sounds of that private middle school better. Independent projects and no grades? I would have eaten that up at your kids' ages.

Thanks, ColinsMum. To answer your question about knock-on effects, yes, the pullout is an entree to math tracking in the middle school. Math seems to be the only subject in which they do such overt differentiation at that school. Doing the pullout in 5th grade seems to be a gold ticket for 8th (or maybe its 9th, not sure) grade math in 6th grade, if that makes any sense. This is where our kids would have to be placed to join their mathy peers as they all start middle school. Our elementary principal has committed to getting us into that math class for 6th grade through the back door (since we won't have the pull out) next year if we choose, and the teacher has committed to providing (in 5th) the math preparation for a smooth transition despite no pull out. A compromise for both of them.

And to add to the mix, dd (the one who tests so well), claims no interest in math, although she readily engages in happy mathy discussions at the dinner table. So we want to honor that a bit, by not pushing competitions or other extracurriculars that are explicit about math. We rather try to show her when the occasion arises how math fits in with some of her other interests....

I do second ColinsMum's point about staying where you are if things are going well. As for Middle School, I recently read the book "Doing School," which -- though it is a case study about a high school and thus has perhaps limited generalizability -- struck enough of a chord that it gives me a strong "gut" reaction against the "rat race" middle school. (And, actually, the one kid in the book who was staying true to the value of personal inquiry had been somewhat "innoculated" by going to a cool, project-based middle school.)

What do you want your kid to value? Getting good grades so they can get into a good school so they can get a good job, or being curious life-long learners -- which, I think will ultimately end up with the good job. The thing about "getting good grades" that bothers me is that it becomes too much about meeting the teacher/school's/standardized test's expectations, and not enough about, you know, actually learning.

I don't know enough about the "progressive" school to have an opinion about it. What is their educational philosophy? Do they have adequate resources? (I remember a cool little school near the town I used to live where the "librarian" had no library; he would come to the public library to check out stuff for the kids...)

Hmm... While I, uh, still agree with myself, CFK gave me pause. I agree, you should take your kids personalities and drives into consideration.

Also re the rat race school... I went to a school that probably fits pretty well with the "rat race" definition (eg, 15+% of my class went to Ivy Leagues, and my school was 1500+ miles from New England...) But now that I think about it, yes, I did some degree of "doing school", but mostly I didn't worry about grades or pleasing teachers; instead, I usually felt bored. Now, maybe this still makes the case for the "progressive" school as a better educational fit, but the point is it occurs to me that HG+ kids might not feel the same kind of pressure as other kids do in a rat race type school.

I agree that the kid personalities are important. Neither of my kids is super competitive. I think this was a factor in dd's results on the Explore - she was cool as a cucumber that morning, willing to humor her parents for a reward of a pancake breakfast. Academic fearlessness. On the other hand, given unstructured time, she would not choose academics. She is an avid reader, and would generally choose to reread her old favorites. Given the assignment of an independent project, however, I think she would do well. She has many interests, is likely to do well in researching and organizing.

They have never been in a really competitive environment, so It is hard to guess how they would react. Dd is a bit dreamy, it is possible that she would be oblivious. I honestly don't know if a competitive environment would rev her up (or whether I want her to be revved up) or shut her down (which I know I don't want).

I think ds is more likely to energized by a competitive environment in a positive way and really enjoy it. On the other hand, he is less organized and I can see potential value for him in doing independent projects. Learning to follow through on something like that would be a real benefit to him.

To answer Clay's question, the "progressive" (I'm not up on the edu-lingo, but the call themselves this as though it means something to others) school is a K-8 school, much smaller than the rat race middle school. They *do* have a library (I went on a school tour about 5 years ago and saw the books), and specials teachers (art, music, Spanish....), but resources are clearly more limited than the public school (competitive at state and national levels in science and math competitions). They have *two* multiage classrooms at the middle school grade level, so there would be the option of having the twins in different classrooms, which is a likely priority.

Okay, I looked it up - here are qualities of progressive education:
- Emphasis on learning by doing � hands-on projects, experiential learning
- Integrated curriculum focused on thematic units
- Strong emphasis on problem solving and critical thinking
- Group work and development of social skills
- Understanding and action as the goals of learning as opposed to rote knowledge
- Collaborative and cooperative learning projects
- Education for social responsibility and democracy
- Integration of community service and service learning projects into the daily curriculum
- Selection of subject content by looking forward to ask what skills will be needed in future society
- De-emphasis on textbooks in favor of varied learning resources
- Emphasis on life-long learning and social skills
- Assessment by evaluation of child�s projects and productions

It sounds good, but would have to see it in action to be convinced.

Ultimately, we'll probably explore both options and get input from the kids before deciding...

Our daughter just got promoted from 5th to 7th grade for next year. Even though we are at one of the top middle schools in our area, she just wasn't getting enough gifted support. She has been bored in school for years but in the past 2-3 years, started acting-out more behaviorally at home because she was so frustrated. We have her in saxophone (at an advanced level with a private teacher), advanced art classes, and club volleyball. Everything the kid does, she excels at. Our public middle school has a similar philosophy as yours, that the advanced subjects they offer are sufficient (althugh they don't really begin advanced academic tracking until 7th grade in Math and 8th grade for all others). Over the past year, I put together an argument using the Iowa Acceleration Scale, feedback and support from the gifted teacher and regular teachers, had outside IQ and academic testing done. In addition to this, my daughter had to take the 6th grade end of the year curriculum exams, which I thought was unfair given that there would of course be gaps in her learning. She scored A's and B's on all exams and we just learned today that the principal is promoting her based on all of the consistent evidence (first time the middle school principal -- grades 5-8 has promoted a child in over 5 years). So, if you decide to try for promotion, think ahead, have all of your data lined up and go for it. My daughter's needs just couldn't be met sufficiently with the pull out gifted services that she was getting and behaviorally and peer-wise, it was compromising her development to stay in an underchallenging academic environment. Good luck to you and your children!

Interesting post to read and a lot that I can relate to. DH and I are both academics in the sciences, so I know where you're coming from.

Just on face value the progression schools sounds very interesting (obviously factor in, personality etc. like PP said) but I wonder how good it is in practice? Is it possible to ask if they have had experience with gifted children in the past? Do you know any other parents of gifted children there? One small red flag I saw in your list was the group projects. Group projects tend to be bad for gifted kids and many times they end up carrying the vast weight of the project.

Another thing. If you picked one school or the other could you switch later on if it was a bad fit? I know about math tracking, it was something I had to deal with at the same age when I switched into a public school but at the time they let me test into. If the progressive school was a bad fit could your kids do the same?

FWIW, I agree to you to a certain extent about the 'elite' university. More in the sense that it makes your life easier later on (by using the name). I've seen first hand how sometimes a name can just get your foot in the door. On the other hand, many small privates (at least for college) offer better scholarships and have way more interaction with the teachers, so there's some positives there too. But, in my experience, for grad school you really have to go for the biggest name possible...

Theresa, at some point in the process this year, I did consider skipping. Our kids were in a 4th/5th class as 4th graders, so they could have had a fairly seamless move on to middle school next year (starts in 6th grade here) with the kids in their class who were 5th graders. I dropped the idea of pursuing a skip once I found out they would keep the same teacher for 5th if they stayed at the elementary school next year. Although I don't necessary agree with all her opinions, I am delighted that she *has* thought a lot about education philosophy - and she is truly dedicated to making it work. She knows the curriculum well, knows how to differentiate. The kids are thrilled to be in her class next year, and we have been very fortunate not to have problems with boredom and/or behavior - our case is not a crisis here but really a philosophical choice. So in the end I am at peace with the decision to leave them in her class for 5th. I would be much *less* comfortable with them skipping 6th, the first year of middle school. The public middle school is much bigger than their elementary and I am sure social groups get established that first year... The progressive private school does not have grades, but rather multi-age classrooms. Our kids would join 11-14 year olds there.

Newmom - Your question is a good one about the progressive school and gifted kids, and I think it all comes down to the individual teachers. A few years back I spoke to a mom about her experiences with her son (the son is now in grad school) there. Her son is phenomenally talented in math (Putnam winner, etc.), and also happens to have an Asperger's diagnosis. She was very happy with the school. They asked the school not to even attempt math instruction (I think the parents hired a tutor for math), and the fit for the kid was great in every other way. Our case is quite different (no Asperger's or math prodigies), but this is a good data point. But also, there have likely been changes in the school in the intervening decade.... It is much much smaller than the public school, so more limited in social opportunities, including those with other smart kids, and this is one of the things I struggle with. And, am I depriving my kids if they miss out on Future Problem Solvers or Science Olympiad, etc. by sending them to the private?

On elite schools - both dh and I were undergrads at Caltech, and in my opinion the level of instruction I received as an engineering student there was *way* higher than what I teach at My Good State U. The difference in what is expected of the students at those two places is like night and day. I believe that surviving Caltech was an enormous boost to my confidence as a scientist. At moments of self-doubt, I often take strength from knowing I'm well trained for what I do - with a training as rigorous as it comes. I'd really like my kids to *have the option* to choose undergrad schools like this, and to me that means exposure at some point to an academically demanding school situation. I always thought that would start in middle school, and this is really what I am questioning. Can we let them pursue independent projects through middle school, and wait until high school for a more demanding curriculum? I am surprising myself in moving from "no way" for an answer to "maybe."....

Moving on to graduate training at an elite university - I agree that the pedigree itself can open doors, but also having a big name as a research mentor also creates opportunities. I think that grad students can many times get training of equal quality at schools other than that top tier, but those other factors (school name, connections) can significantly impact their future career. I was on a search committee last year for an administrative position. The candidate who was hired negotiated a $5k increase in the starting salary. The successful argument was that although the person who left had several years experience more than the candidate (the "non-negotiable" salary offer was the same as the person leaving), the candidate was chosen in part because of having a Stanford PhD, and if that was indeed a factor, that gives it a monetary value salarywise....