Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums THINKING BIG About Gifted Education Should programs be 4 high aptitude or achievement?

I didn't read the responses but the middle school that DD will be going to clusters together gifted kids (based on cognitive ability scores or IQ) w/ high achievers into separate classes from the rest of the student population. So if it's a math class, for instance, the entire class will either be gifted or high achieving, or both. I think this is nice because sometimes a kid will have a high ability in a certain subject, but not test with a high IQ. And then there are those kids who have high IQs but are either twice exceptional or under-achieving for one reason or another. The classes are not more "work" (supposedly) but deeper or accelerated content. We are not actually there yet so I don't know how well it works.

In our district, "high achieving" means high standardized test scores using a LOCAL norm.

I've been VERY naive as to how much tutoring/prepping is going on in our district - a lot of these kids have been cramming since preschool. Because of this, you end up with results where nearly 30% of the district scoring in the top 4% nationally on some standardized tests.

So even though my (non-prepped/non-tutored) son's standardized test scores are all within the 90th percentiles nationally AND with a 133 FSIQ/133 GAI on the WISC-V (very even profile) and a 131 Cogat, he is NOT considered gifted.

I was actually told by the gifted director that he ISN'T EVEN CLOSE to being gifted. This is a district where 18% of students get either self-contained or pull-out gifted services.

This makes me sad on so many levels. Sad for the kids being pressured to cram for the tests. Sad that the families must feel that's the only way to get the right education for the kids. Sad for the actual gifted kids who are then ignored, like your son.

^ our district is somewhat similar.

This can be a real problem for HG students, because administration often feels like:

1. Parents with concerns about such students are largely seen as helicopterey/special snoflakey, not as appropriately involved. To be clear, there *are* a lot of parents that are unhealthily "involved" here.

2. We already skew the curriculum high because 30% of our students are GT-- there is a sense of surreality about conversations in which you spend the first twenty minutes convincing the person you are speaking with that you aren't there to argue for an A.. that your child has straight A's, and that is why you are there... It's very disorienting-- you spend a lot of time talking past such administrators. They can't quite grasp that you aren't about what is on paper (the straight-A resume, that is).



I know that they've done a few grade skips in other kids (but quietly), and that tends to be what actually happens with HG students. Beyond that, there is not much actual substance for gifted students who are actually identified. There are some club-based things, which are mostly run by a parents' cabal (best word I can think of)-- most of their kids are solidly bright-to-MG, and they do NOT appreciate kids at higher LOG.

In fact, the entire system often rejects the notion that there are kids at higher LOG, and you'd better stay solidly under the radar unless you want to be the target of a fair amount of the nasties, socially.

I've given up even convincing anyone else that we didn't particularly PUSH our DD into uni at barely 15. Better for them to simply forget that she even exists, and let us all go on about our lives.

Here, it's ALL about high achievement.

Just... not too high.

Our district looks at the last two or three MAP test scores and one CogAT test score taken in the fall of 2nd grade to determine if a student can get into the gifted program or not in 3rd grade.

My DYS DS7 is in first grade and I have asked the school to put him into the gifted program (math only for now) in 2nd grade, taking challenged math with the 3rd graders. So far, no luck. The district still would like to see his fall MAP and CogAT test scores to determine what to do with him despite the fact that I provided them with his WISC-V full report and his MAP test score of 99% in the winter of 1st grade.

It appears that our district only looks at the MAP test scores and the CogAT scores. Teacher recommendation isn't considered and even the private IQ test scores may not weigh in too much.

I admit to still being somewhat puzzled by how educators can simply refuse to acknowledge reputable assessments like the WISC as evidence of giftedness, yet use achievement tests for which a child can prep/be prepped as their standard.

My theory is that they must either be intimidated by how to interpret the IQ testing or that their programs really are about churning out great test takers, rather than about allowing children to work at their appropriate level.

If by high-achieving, you mean overeager, extroverted, people-pleaser, perfectionist, likes busywork etc., then no, programs should not be for high achievers (or not focused on them, at leadt) because that encourages unhealthy traits and hothousiing.

On the other hand, if a student happens to be able to do algebra and is ready to be in the honors algebra class, then I don't think IQ should matter -- it's their ability, and whether they're officially gifted or not, they need to be at their ability level.

At the same time, I don't think giftedness is exactly a "magic card" allowing kids to be able to do everything at a high level -- maybe some gifted kids at the same age just aren't ready for algebra, whether because of preparation or ability, and so that might not be the best choice.

I doubt anyone here would deny any student an appropriate learning environment, but I just want to say that I don't think it's right to decide, "Well, Susan, your parents took you to Kumon and now you'll be bored in Geometry....but your IQ is only 112. Julie has a 150 IQ and will be in the class instead, even though she didn't pay attention last year and isn't prepared for it." Not all gifted kids are geniuses and not all NT kids are incapable of advanced work.