I have twice exceptional kids, so I feel for parents who see the needs of their learning disabled not being met, as well as those parents who have gifted kids not being challenged.

I like this first article since it is from a mother's point of view of questioning the funding and programs for both her autistic son and her gifted daughter. I also find the comments below the article quite telling.

Recently, I came across a Time article from 1937 questioning "fast learners," the "mentally gifted," and the "lack of attention" when compared to "the feeble-minded." So the issue is an old one, and I wonder what can we as parents to actually move this country's education system to be at least fair with funding.

Perhaps, with the economy as it is, this isn't the time to push for public gifted education, but if not now, when? How many more decades need to go by?

Newsweek: Autism and Education

1937 Time: Fast Learners

I really dislike discussions framing the situation in this light, because the obvious answer is "both!"

I always prefer whatever can be done cheaply to help kids at both ends of the Bell Curve. Too often schools think spending money is the only answer to any problem, and so they don't think creatively about ways to help kids. I'd like more cheap, creative solutions at both ends of the curve.

That's my answer and I'm sticking to it!

I certainly don't believe in "either or" but both as well. My feeling is that extremes on both ends of the spectrum are in a sense "disabilities" I know that isn't the best term to use, but a child with asynchronous development on either end, is going to make learning difficult and needs to have support. Whether a child is in a class with a 50 IQ or a 150 IQ, if the class is being taught towards the 100 IQ there is going to be some difficulties. I do feel in a sense however, that more support should be with the extremes. That just makes sense to me. Ideally if there is tons of money to go around, help everyone out...LOL. I think it is completely ridiculous that there is no mandated gifted programming or funding in all states. How sad.

Coming from a state at the top of the "best schools" list to a state at the bottom, it would be nice to see funds go to education in general, for all kids.

Completely agree w/you Shelly very well put!

GA has a mandated program and full funding, but trying to get your child tested to be in the programs is absolutely ridiculous.

I was recently told by a teacher in our district that here, unless you're at the top or the bottom, you fall between the crack. For kids in the AP Honors or Honors track, if an assignment is not turned in, you get a phone call the next day. Same for kids at the bottom. But if you're in the middle, no phone calls. I know this happened to my neighbor. Her son was failing and never a word from the teacher. WHen asked why the teacher didn't send a note, email or call, the teacher said "That's not my job. I don't have time for that." Now this is a 9th grader and they should be more independent but if the child continues to not do work etc, I think a parent should be notified. I thought that was the teacher's job?

This is why I love digital gradebooks. (We use Powerschool) Some teachers hate them but when I was teaching full-time, it was perfect! Parents get a private password and everything is online in real time. So if your kid didn't do homework? You can see it that night. Your kid failed the test? You can see it instantly. I resolved so many debates by saying "Did you check online?" Even in our relatively poor school district, every single parent had an email address that could be notified when a child skipped school or dropped below a certain grade point (set by the parents!)


How about just plain old teaching? At our *hopefully* new school, the teachers were stunned that my K DS was not allowed to move up for reading and math at his current school. One teacher put it really well "Why would I want to reinvent the wheel when the 2nd grade teacher already knows how to teach that?"

In most cases, fluidity is pretty darned cheap! Someone else is already doing that somewhere... harnessing it is cheaper than making it new.

CAMom - our district is now using a similar system this year so that should alleviate some of these issues.

YES!!! I like how you think! And that fluidity costs how much extra? Um, nothing extra, at least in 99.9% of the cases, right?

*sigh*

CAMom has a great point.
I'm wondering how much extra it costs over average per pupil cost, to teach a child who learns twice as fast as normal, or one who learns half as fast as normal? Sure, the slower ones might take an extra year or two more than average, but the faster ones should balance that by taking a year or two less, right?

I did not read the article yet. I can share that in nj the cost for a private preschool for children with autism can cost upwards of 90k per year. I work in the field so I have first hand info on tuition. In nj the district foots the bill. We need to look to the families of children with autism as role models. They have organized and become very effective in getting their children the services the require & deserve.

Hi Kriston! Both ends of the bell curve do get money, but the article was about the imbalance of spending of funds. I just read somewhere (I'll see if I can find where) that often there is no money set aside for gifted, and when there is a GATE program spending is (at best) eleven times less than for the lower end of it. Also, unlike the lower end of that bell curve, some schools only can afford a limited number of GATE students and select the number and then no more. In contrast to all of the others being given federal funding with IEPs and special programs and tests.

I am interested in hearing what you have seen as cheap, creative solutions. Would you mind sharing what you have experienced or seen? Where we live now, gifted programs are very limited and often not available after elementary school.
I've been trying to help advise some friends, but there is little to no money available.

The teachers have 34-5 students in a classroom on average and acceleration isn't always enough, especially when you need them to accelerate to levels that are at middle/high school, even in a different town. We did experience this also previously in CA, but there was gifted funding and some really awesome programs that helped them become highly engaged and even take control independently in their education. Even then, for me, acceleration is just one part of gifted education, so again, I'd appreciate what you've seen or experienced.

Thanks for the input!

Don't get me wrong: I'm definitely pro-money for GT services! And more is better! But I don't like the notion that we have to choose between one end of the curve or the other, nor do I agree with the (too-common) notion that if there's no money, there's nothing that can be done for GT kids.

How about grouping the GT students within a classroom? It costs no extra money, assuming there are enough students to fill a class--it uses the same number of teachers, classrooms, etc. as not grouping them--but it allows at least some course compacting or acceleration. Even if there are different LOGs in a room, differentiation is easier if you don't have the full spectrum of the Bell Curve all in one place.

How about assigning projects that allow GT kids to go further, do more? Research projects or advanced math work are good opportunities for this. Allow GT kids to spend less time on things they can already do (this is big!), and let them devote that time to their project instead. No extra money required, just a redistribution of the child's time.

Allowing more independent work is often helpful. I think GT kids need a teacher, and they should get their fair share of the teacher's time. GT doesn't mean "able to learn everything on his/her own." But if given a choice between sticking with the class and having the chance to progress independently, many kids and their parents would vote for the independent work. This may not work well for extroverts, of course.

I'm not a huge fan of differentiation as a policy choice. I think it's too little and too easily undermined. It's also the one GT service that can actually wind up harming a GT child, since if a child gets good differentiation one year and zero differentiation the next, it is the same as holding back a child a year or more! Not what a GT kid needs!

But with that caveat, if there's nothing else available and money is an issue, dedicated teachers in a school that really cares about meeting the needs of GT kids can make differentiation work, often with little time or effort and no money. Sometimes even using the same materials that the rest of the class gets and just issuing different directions about the assignments.

This is just an off the top of my (not-an-expert) head. I'm sure there are plenty of other things that can be done that are not expensive.

I have long wondered why this isn't tried more often. Could it be that, simply by the numbers, there aren't enough kids who would qualify? For example, our neighborhood elementary school has about 500 kids, that's less than 100 kids per grade, so hypothetically only a few in each grade would fit in the 98%-or-above bracket - but I know so many people who send their kids to other schools (we have a lot of charters in our district) that I have to wonder whether there would have been more kids. And there are certainly plenty of other elementary schools in surrounding neighborhoods that if the kids from just a few were pooled it should easily make a classroom.

(I have a similar question about our district's full time gifted program, which takes place at a handful of the 30+ elementary schools - my understanding is that there is, or used to be, a significant waiting list, but I don't get why - why not just make another class - why does that cost more than keeping the kids in their regular classrooms).

I think it has more to do with fears about the self-esteem of the kids not in that class, as well as the crankiness of parents and/or teachers who think fair = having the whole Bell Curve represented in every class.

Even if they put the top 5% in a class, it would work better than it does now...

Or there's the grouping that doesn't try to fill the entire class with GT kids, but has various groupings in a given class. The big caveat about it, as I recall, was that the GT kids shouldn't be with the lowest performers nor with the top-but-not-GT group. GT kids hampered the performance of both those groups.

Quickie: this is a problem lacking a will to solve it.

By this, I mean that the school systems don't feel a need to address the problem because the gifted kids do well on the standardized tests. These tests are basically all that matters right now, so....

I'm dubious that the problem will be solved in the absence of a mass movement (as happened among the parents of disabled kids in the 70s/80s and with the government in the 50s/60s).

Val

I have been looking into the gifted advocacy issue in my state. The school districts will not do squat if you don't get dpi involved. I just got dpi to order my school to provide services to dd 2nd grade based on her GAI. Now the principle is mad at me because they have to reevaluate all students who have asked for gt services based upon GAI.

I was wondering how many of you have contacted your state senators. I am just starting this process in my state. Under the new stimuls plan there is a ton of money being put into education. Now is the time for us to rise up and advocate for our childrens needs. I urge, I emplore you to call all your represenatives, both federal and state. Call your dpi gifted and talented person, ask them who is gt friendly. There is money there but we all need to ASK for it.

The problem with the stimulus money is that it will just last a couple of years and the inflation that will follow with hollow out budgets.