Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Parenting and Advocacy Immersion vs. Gifted Education [Decision Update]

@binip may know these answers, or maybe not, but I'm familiar with the gifted program she's considering and it's like this:

Kids are in gifted classrooms all day every day. They're arranged into classes based on their reading scores.

Math: Kids are leveled on the first day of school, placed 1-3 levels up from their grade depending on demonstrated proficiency. They can't move up during the year, but are re-tested every year.

Language arts: The program utilizes specialized curriculum marketed for gifted students, not the standard district stuff. Lots of custom assignments, and expectations are reasonably individualized in this area.

Science: Uses the hands-on kits for the next year up.

Social Studies: Uses the regular curriculum for the same grade, with some extra projects.

Critical thinking is a keystone of the program and they do work hard on critical thinking as a theme across all areas.

It's a reasonable program in most respects.

Thanks! Yes, this is pretty much what I've seen. The main thing that I like is that they challenge the kids more--that's the critical thinking aspect, with higher expectations. They also do a lot of enrichment and link kids to camps, after-school activities, etc. To be honest, the whole district does, but this school in particular is great. The school-wide focus is on literacy and writing this year and you can tell.

It's good because it's so reasonable... almost as if it was designed by someone who knew what they were doing.

Regarding the other posts, thank you! Some answers:


If only my IQ had dropped when I learned my first foreign language, or my second, or if bilingual children around the world were somehow being slowed down by being dumped into English and French immersion international baccalaureate programs by their affluent, multi-lingual parents, I could see this.

For me, immersion education is a window into two worlds. It's like getting to try a triathlon instead of a marathon. Or rather, running a marathon in the mountains rather than on flat land (they say the Seattle, Denver and San Francisco marathons are among the hardest "conventional" marathons in the world... mainly because they are hilly or high altitude).

Runners in Kenya train in the mountains where oxygen is harder to come by and then kick butt in the lowlands. To me, that's what immersion is like.

Not tying their legs together, not at all. Learning a language frees your mind from the constraint of mono-lingualism. Sure that might slow computation time, but it's far more freeing and you learn to compensate.


Oh, middle school, yet more dilemmas! I wish you the best. Do they have to go to the same one?


My older daughter is a perfectionist and does obsess, but only over socially acceptable things. She is emotionally obsessive, not intellectually obsessive, although it does bother her a LOT when she gets an answer wrong at school. So far she has gotten one computation problem wrong (after DST switch, natch) and one explanation wrong (you know the kind... Math Expressions, not a bad curriculum, but sometimes kids who know the concept a little too well can't explain why it is true).

Still, your DD sounds more "gifted" than mine. My little one, well, definitely not verbally gifted (unless you count her sense of humor and knowing two languages, but again keep in mind she didn't teach herself, it was immersion), though both my daughters have been said by their music teacher to be extremely talented. She's really the only one to say anything, though. But then, again, we live in an area where we know a lot of very high performing children.


The school houses part of the district gifted program, so if she does get in, there's no move, and I believe she'll be interested because she likes to be in the top groups. I just thought she'd benefit from immersion, but as this thread goes on, and as I talk to her, the more I think she'd be better off with extra-curriculars and staying where she is.


I can certainly ask, but I believe there is about a -.000000000001% chance of them saying yes.

It says on the website that scores will not be released until a certain date, why they won't be released, and then in bold letters, do not contact the district regarding your child's test scores.

Of course there will be attrition, but they want to prevent extra attrition from strivers who will move from program to program. I think this is reasonable. Their thought is, probably about 10% of these children will be 145+ because it's a special pool of kids: striving, aware parents in a high-income, high-achievement area. So they will lose a ton of kids to that program if they don't ask you to make that decision before accepting. Sure they might lose profoundly gifted little ones...


Oh, ugh. I'm sorry. These are both public schools I'm looking at.

Learning a second (or third or fourth) language is a great thing and learning grammar, reading and writing in a second language will be fascinating to a good percentage of gifted kids.

On the other hand maths and science that are below what you need are as boring in a second language as they were in your first language. Struggling to understand the teacher's explanation (or understanding it well in a second language) is not a substitute for an accelerated and enriched STEM programme.

" Struggling to understand the teacher's explanation (or understanding it well in a second language) is not a substitute for an accelerated and enriched STEM programme."

True, and that's why I started this thread.

I guess I just have to balance the likelihood that she will need to be almost exactly one or two grade levels ahead but not need individualized instruction, with the likelihood that even if she's really bright, she will be able to benefit from enrichment at home regardless of whether she's in immersion, regular classrooms, or a gifted program.

"On the other hand maths and science that are below what you need are as boring in a second language as they were in your first language."

Well, school's boring to most kids and that's a whole other can of worms.

The question of STEM enrichment is a big one, though. My guess is that the immersion school will have a lot of very bright kids and that they'll be able to go very deep and we can supplement that at home. At most it will be more work for me.

On the other hand, in the USA opportunities for native English speakers to learn a world language as children are rare. Families interested in supporting their children's interest to be bilingual/multilingual may find immersion programs to be their only option.

Some may say it is precisely the "struggle" that gifted children crave and thrive on, as it may provide a suitable intellectual "challenge" for them while they are learning to puzzle together the language. Once the language is mastered, they would benefit from appropriate curriculum and pacing.

Yes, all kids may benefit from enrichment at home: support from parents to learn and explore in the child's area(s) of interest.

Spoken with the freshness and anticipation of a parent at the beginning of the journey. Yes, it can become rather bedraggling to keep up with a gifted kiddo.

I believe your planning and careful consideration of the options will be very beneficial.

Howler karma sent you a pm

Well... I am definitely a parent of young children and have a lot to learn, but I was thinking more of the PTSA commitments, which are crazy no matter how average one's child is.

I'm not too worried about keeping up with our kids. Since we do enrichment activities every weekend just for the heck of it, and we're consummate nerds, I don't think they are under-stimulated. They have daily opportunities to do things like make music boxes, write short computer code, write their own plays using playbills from the theater, use one of several musical instruments lying around, or do math worksheets in exchange for breakfast cereals. I write my own phonetic crosswords based on household themes and Bob Books for the little one, which she fills in herself.

This isn't something we had to think up. This stuff is all there because it is hour our homes were when we were growing up. This summer they are going to several art, science, and sport camps and I think they will really like it. It's not because they are smart. It's because *I* think those camps are worth the money, haha, and I'm not going to just save $50/week to stick them in the YMCA. No matter how smart you are, I don't think your brain should be left to rot.

Edited to add: that sounds insulting to the YMCA, which I know strives to create stimulating, enriched programs for every child, and which has a lot of amazing, incredibly bright young employees and volunteers. I didn't mean the YMCA in particular. I just mean that the overall enriched lifestyle I provide, I'd do even if I knew my child had an IQ of 80, or 100, or 115, or 150.

Would you outline the steps in the process or point to a link with the resources, contacts, etc that a kiddo would need to have their research peer-reviewed and published? Thanks!

"Peer-review" is embedded in the publication (and granting/funding) process in STEM.

As apm notes-- it's complicated in some ways and deceptively simple-seeming in others.

This is why my post is only going to offer two distinct steps-- which are going to be the most appropriate for any PG student, just as they are for graduate students who are ready to undertake serious research:


1. Work with a faculty member who is affiliated with a research institution or organization.

2. Be mentored in that setting.

Honestly, even PG kids aren't really in a position to DIY this one; there's too much to the process at the pro-level.

This is part of training in STEM-- being mentored about the way that the system works, that is. It's essential to make sure that you understand how the peer-review process works (or doesn't-- and when there are pitfalls, they may well only be obvious to those with significant savvy about that system within the particular niche/subdiscipline)-- and how to leverage that system to get funding to continue research. It's not really about the publications, so much-- it's about the fact that conducting research in STEM is generally quite an expensive proposition to begin with, and it has to be self-sustaining.