Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums General Discussion Parenting arms race article

Well, why not try? For example, the Russian School of Math has numerous locations in Massachusetts and a few in other states. My merely bright middle child likes the classes. The RSM site http://www.russianschool.com/about-us/our-results says 75% of RSM students taking the SAT in 7th grade score 600+ and 33% score 700+. Let's see how he does in a few years.

Why not try?

Well, as long as the child is enjoying the process, and doesn't feel that s/he is sacrificing more meaningful activities, then it's evident that this is not what is being described by the original article.

What is being described by the original article is a no-holds-barred, over-the-top, all-consuming Race to Defeat The Others for precious slots for the most capable and highest achieving. Please note that this kind of thing actively HURTS kids like those on the forum because kids who don't actually, naturally belong in those slots wind up sitting next to our kids, and dulling discussion and pacing in opportunities that OUR kids actually need. If that makes sense.

Personally, I'd be wary of any program that touts as a bonafide the out-of-level achievement scores of participants. That (again-- to ME) doesn't seem to me to be a good goal for children.


But what also kills a lot of joy for HG+ kids is sitting next to kids who have been hyper-prepped and have no love, joi de vivre , or whatever you want to call it-- for the subject.

Some of you may not yet see the results-- but trust me that such students RUIN the experience of dual enrollment or AP coursework. Because they are the ones interrupting the teacher to ask "will this be on the test?" when a smaller cohort of students is interested in exploring a topic under discussion.

It's maddening.

Because there can be only one!

Bostonian, it's interesting to see you make this statement, given that you're a big supporter of Charles Murray. One of his major points is that IQ can't be made to increase appreciably.

It doesn't always take high IQ thought to produce high achievement. In fact, we should be focusing on performance according to NSGT. The definition of Gifted and Talented according to NSGT:

(quote)
This definition of giftedness is the broadest and most comprehensive and is used by many school districts. It speaks of talent, which includes all areas of a child’s life: academic, artistic, athletic, and social. Most schools limit their definition and their programs to academics, but it is important to focus on performance and accomplishment. It is not enough to just have the talent; you must be using that talent to achieve at remarkably high levels. However, this definition does also recognize that while all very talented students have the potential to achieve at high levels, some may not have yet realized or demonstrated that potential. Such students may be underachievers, twice exceptional, or represent underserved groups who have not had a nurturing environment to bring out those talents. Finally, this definition is a comparative one; these students achieve or have the potential to achieve at levels way above their peers.
(end quote)

Personally, I have no problem with lower IQ students in a GT class / program so long as they can be productive, they can keep up with the work, they're able to stay emotionally healthy, and they enjoy the program. It's important that a well trained professional in GT be heading the identification program and evaluate students in that program to ensure they're not doing themselves more harm than good.

The whole thought pattern of "Levels" of service seems to be missing in education. The idea being to help each student to their potential with services that they require to do so without burdening them with what they can't handle. Readers here understand that even at this end of the bell curve the level of service needed to do that is quite extensive and varied.

The problem is when the GT program becomes geared towards those kids instead of the students it was originally designed to help. My son's 6th grade GT class was so full of high achievers, that the homework load was over the top. The peer pressure between the kids was intense and the teacher expected perfection. They expectation was the kids were as organized as a senior in high school. It wasn't all bad, there was a very high level of discussion, the students did a lot of interested and open ended projects. But the district doesn't really give one much of a choice, it's either this program, your kid sitting bored in the regular classroom or homeschooling or private school.

I am aware of the contradiction, which is why I phrased my message as "why not try" rather than "RSM is known to improve math aptitude". We have the money, and the Tiger Mother will make the time to ferry our children to after-school programs she thinks may help them.

Our district wants both high ability and high achieving kids in their "magnet" for highly gifted. So they have to have a minimum composite score on the CogAT (or an IQ test) of 98th percentile AND achievement test results above the 98th percentile UNLESS IQ is over the 99.5th percentile or something in which case achievement testing doesn't matter.
They claim that there is a large percentage of quirky and/or 2e kids in the program, many with behavioral issues or various immaturities. It doesn't sound like the kids they are getting with their cut-offs are the perfect high-achieving ones. I'm a little surprised by that, given that in most cases they want to see very high achievement scores in both math and reading, along with the high ability scores. To get the achievement scores that they are looking for a kid would need to be doing above grade level work. For instance there would be no way for a third grader to get math achievement scores at the 98th percentile unless they learned their multiplication, division, fractions, etc. ahead of schedule. And someone has to teach them that.

Just who do you think it was originally geared for? Have you viewed the description of definition of "Gifted and Talented" as it is defined by the school you're referring to?

A teacher with certification in gifted and talented education should know how to do the very thing for their students that they're in there for, to be DIFFERENTIATED for. If a GT teacher is attempting to give the same work to all students in the program, that's actually pretty laughable and completely defeats the whole mindset of differentiation. This is why I spoke about levels of service. Good GT teachers understand and practice this. If yours isn't, you should be asking why not.

That doesn't sound like a program that is helping all gifted (and talented) students to their potential. It sounds to me like they're ignoring unmotivated gifted children, that's a shame as many students ignored and unchallenged by the system stop producing at a high level by the 3rd grade because by then they've grown bored out of their mind.