Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Parenting and Advocacy What "That Parent" looks like

Also, amusingly enough, the math gifted program around here is something that some parents would like to escape from.

Maybe they thought they won a prize or something, but the not quite so gifted are having a tough time with some of it.

So that's funny in the context of this thread.

I haven't played with my kids enough, mathwise, to know whether they are like me (let's sleep through Calculus!) or not.

The real problem is that the number isn't even something that necessarily makes sense.

We're measuring *something*, but IQ isn't quite true intelligence, which I don't think we've figured out what to measure.

It's really a proxy for something that has an odd geometry and which we see as "fuzzy" because we don't know what we're looking at.

And in any case, half the problem is that our "let's separate kids into industrial lots by age and process them" is technically insane.

Exactly, Jon.

You both nailed my school district precisely.

The higher the threshold you set for a gifted program, the more the identified children may need a different educational program, but the fewer the parents there are to support such a program. Therefore a relatively broad definition of giftedness may be politically inevitable if a gifted program is to survive.

Agreed.

Actually, I fundamentally disagree with "This one is Gifted and that one is Not Gifted," which might make it sound I think All Children Are Gifted. I don't. I just think it's very complicated and not very measurable by the tests, which are a blunt instrument at best. I wish we could just teach to the kids where they are, which would first of all mean demolishing grade structures. But my fantasy education world is awfully idealistic.

As I've said before here, I see vast differences in functioning even in a group of kids who are all 130+ in DD's class. It's really something. (However, I think the magnet attracts unusual kids and those with LDs--you have to really think your kid needs it to transfer, as there are some reasons why the school is outwardly unattractive to striver parents).

The magic of language and labels... we have magnet program lotteries where you pick a 1st 2nd and 3rd choice. Only if there are not enough students in the 1st picks, do the 2nd and 3rd get picked. One of the magnet programs is named "Traditional" and its pool of 1st picks is many times the seats, the stranger sounding "Learning Immersion" feeder to the gifted path often has less 1st picks.

So, with that type of lottery, you could push it even further for self-selection... maybe "Competitive Rigor Prep" vs. "School for Unusual and Asynchronous Learners"

Not entirely, because economies of scale. Magnet schools.

My DD's school only identified 2 kids her own age for G/T instruction, so yeah, the offerings were limited. But if the district were to concentrate services at a school, not only would they likely find 20 kids in the city schools for an all-day program, but they'd also attract homeschoolers (and their budget dollars) back into the fold.

That idea makes a lot of sense, which is why the district will never implement it, until someone successfully sues them for violating the state legislation guaranteeing the right of FAPE for gifted children.

Ah. Well, that explains why we don't do gifted here. Very little of our budget is per-pupil, and the schools are overcrowded. If more kids are pulled out-of-district, homeschool, private, or otherwise, the district can avoid opening more schools and spread the existing budget more generously among those who stay. In an extremely screwed-up way, they are trying to give the best education to those who can't afford to buy their own, but with a strong incentive to not make it truly the best around.

Have to disagree here. Where I live at least, tuition buys the following:

• A longer school day (varies from school to school, but usually at least 30 minutes)
• No furlough days because we ran out of money (n=5 this year in the local public schools)
• No short days on Wednesday when school ends at 1:20 pm or so, because we have to have a meeting and we can't possibly meet at 2:30 without a major contract renegotiation to compensate us for the extra 48.43 minutes our time (every week in most or all of the Bay area)
• No "minimum days" when school ends at noon (don't know how many in the local district; at least ten per year).
• Freedom from NCLB-induced test hysteria

I once calculated that because of furloughs and shorter days, public schools around here lose the equivalent of roughly one school day per week compared to private schools. This means that private schools have lots of time for music, art, science, PE, recess, and what I call "random misc," which is random stuff that they do. One year the first grade learned ceramics once a week for 9 weeks; in second grade, it was swimming lessons. Etc.

ETA: This information may look very different in different places. The public school I attended in New Hampshire in the 70s and 80s was a wonderful school, for example. But around here these days, that's just not the case.

As for the OP, well, yuck.