All children are gifted one way or another. But because labels are still used to identify children, when I say gifted you immediately know I am referring to children who have high IQs. They intellectually function ahead of their peers on the bell-shaped curve—sometimes far ahead. They also might have learning disabilities along with being gifted. Then, if identified, they are called twice exceptional.
How do states address the gifted? In most places they do little—if anything.
In our nation many politicians and business leaders like to bad mouth America’s students. They pay no mind to the thousands who function at high levels. The so-called ed. reformers blather on about competition and dropout factories while foisting draconian measures like dull one-size-fits-all instruction and worthless, repetitive high-stakes testing. Consider the dearth of gifted programming in this country.
- IL, MO, MI, NY, NH, SD, VT, DE, RI and DC have NO or unknown state gifted programming, possibly it is funded at the local level, and NO or an unknown amount of state funding for gifted education.
- CT, MD, PA, and AL mandate gifted programming but have NO state funding for programs.
- CA, NV, WY, ND, and NM actually have funding, but they mandate NO gifted programming.
- Other states have mandated gifted programming but only partially fund it.
- Only GA, MS, OK, and IA fully fund gifted programming.
—Davidson Institute for Talent Development
Students identified as gifted might get a once a week pull-out class in elementary school. The teachers in these classes can be excellent, credentialed in understanding gifted students, or they may have no background in this area whatsoever.
In this pull-out class children do projects or work on puzzles. Most any child would enjoy such activities. Such programs might also do more harm than good because they could elicit jealousy from the students not in the gifted program.
Pull-out gifted resource classes that meet daily and address academic areas might be the best scenario. Gifted students get to still mingle with their peers in some regular classes and feel a part of the overall school environment (see Meghank comment below).
In middle school, students might get advanced classes, or be blended in with other students in regular classes. They score high on tests and get the work done quickly, or they are uninterested and act out. They learn to hate school. Sometimes, however, these students become high achievers, spinning their wheels over trivial information that has little personal value.
In high school, parents of gifted students rely on Accelerated Placement (AP) classes, which were never classes designed for gifted students per se. But by this time, parents take what they can get in the way of schooling. Students move through material at high speed, but are rarely challenged to think in-depth about a subject. The reliance on testing with AP is fierce. Little, if any, attention is paid to the individual gifted student’s interests or strengths.
International Baccalaureate (IB) might be better because it is oriented more towards projects, but it was never designed for gifted students either.
Even the process of identifying gifted students is unfair and insufficient. I’ve heard horror stories of students who miss the IQ cutoff, usual around 128—130, by a point or two!
Then there are the many disadvantaged children who might never get identified as gifted because their parents are poor and/or not well-versed about requesting psychological testing. How many children fall through the cracks and fail in school because they are uninterested…because no one identified them as gifted?
Many criticize Common Core State Standards, and I don’t see anything that addresses gifted students here either. Common Core is just what it says…it concentrates on common knowledge for everyone. There is no individualization.
Parents should push for the following changes:
- If the class size is reasonable, students should remain in regular classes, no matter the age level, with continuous support from a fully certified gifted ed. teacher. Their assignments should reflect what they need to learn—not the narrow standards of any commercialized program.
- A pull-out daily resource class would benefit gifted students if the focus is on academics.
- Some will say Response to Intervention (RTI) assists gifted students. When gifted students are thrown into huge class sizes there is little if any individualization of learning for that student. RTI is assessment—not intervention.
- If gifted students don’t have access to a decent sized class, they should have the option of a self-contained class with other gifted students. If there are not enough gifted students for a self-contained class in one school, they should be able to attend the school where a gifted class exists, or the school district should provide a gifted learning center.
- Students who miss the gifted cut-off point should be monitored carefully and still receive assistance. And a concerted effort should be made to identify gifted students in poor schools.
- The strengths (gifts) of all students should be highlighted in regular classes.
- The gifted associations and the Council for Exceptional Children should put pressure on politicians to improve school policy for gifted students. Ignoring this population has gone on too long.
As usual, I welcome your suggestions and experiences surrounding this important area of special education.
A G/T child was the reason we started homeschooling.
Which worked out fine for us but shouldn’t be forced on families in this situation.
Not that most families can even consider the option.
The combination of limited funding and limited understanding of G/T needs works against any quick solutions, though, as everyone moves toward more standardization. Sigh. . .
Absolutely right about all! And I know parents, Nance, who don’t know where to begin with homeschooling. I’m happy it worked out for you. Let me know if you have any helpful hints for someone starting out. Thank you!
There’s a lot of good info online or at the local library for those interested in hsing a G/T. One site is Hoagies — http://www.hoagiesgifted.org/home_school.htm
My hint to every new hser is to take some time to deschool and adjust to being in charge of your own days, to get a library card and use it, not to rush out and buy a whole lot of anything right away, and to ease into how you want to homeschool.
Assuming class sizes are too high for true differentiation, I think a pull-out option would be better than the self-contained gifted class. Wouldn’t a self contained class be just as likely to elicit feelings of jealousy in other students as the pull out? I also think it’s a positive experience for gifted students to have non-gifted classmates. Having experienced the gifted pull out program about 20 years ago, I recommend it.
G/T students have their whole lives to meet non-G/T people. It’s not like there’s a shortage of us. 🙂 And it’s not like a self-contained classroom is on its own planet. But, too often, the G/T kid in the regular classroom ends up being the teacher’s helper, the built-in tutor, or just zones out while waiting on everyone else to finish.
Excellent points, Nance! Thanks for your feedback and for reminding me of the Hoagie’s site.
Great point, Meghank! If the pull-out occurred every day and addressed academics I think we could shake hands. I will go back and edit that into the post. Thanks for your feedback!
When I was an elementary principal, many years ago, we started a special program for students identified as gifted during our noon hour . I ran a literature group a couple of days a week, while parent volunteers led such things as a chess club, weaving class, and some other things I can’t remember. Our problem was that the program was too successful; many other kids, who were not “officially”gifted wanted to be included. What we realized was that we had created the proverbial “candy store.” Some students were inside eating candy and others were outside cold and hungry, wanting to be let in. So we opened the program to anyone who was interested and let anyone who lost interest to drop out at any time. This version of the “revolving door theory “of gifted
programing worked very well for our school and our students. The extra benefits were that students could be in a group that met once or twice a week and still enjoy an outdoor noon recess the other days. The group leaders were not over-burdened either. Also, no child missed a regular class. In my opinion it is better for gifted and/or eager children to learn new skills and explore new areas than to be pushed into an advanced curriculum.
Thank you for your comments, Joanne! That sounds like a great way to bring children together. I also agree gifted students shouldn’t be pushed into an advanced curriculum.
Research shows that gifted children do best when surrounded by other gifted children. They tend to challenge and push each other. What Ive seen in classrooms is gifted students placed in mix ability classrooms to be used as “peer tutors.” Gifted students, rather than being pushed as our best and brightest, are being held back and used to try and bring the bottom students up. I am in GA and if what we offer our gifted students is some of the best in the country it is sad. As a gifted student I was blessed to be removed from the regular classroom for every class. We had our own wing of the school. We ate together and played together. We challenged and pushed and created. It was a phenomenal experience and one I wish we continued for all gifted children. Brilliance should not be punished and being the teacher’s helper is not fair.
Wow, sounds like a great program you had in GA, Meg! You guessed our experience…in elem my son was always sitting next to a special ed student or slow learner, or kid with behavior issues. The other gifted kid would be across the room – they never got to be grouped together! I do think the school was using gifted children as role models and peer leaders, since all they really cared about was testing and bringing up the low performing students. My son got increasingly bored and started acting out (lots of doodling, spacing out, no real behavior issues but things that made it obvious he needed more challenge!). In middle school he is in 2 “honors classes” offered, but the other classes are babyish and too easy. Some teachers do not understand gifted children.
I think that key to our country improving on international measures and continuing to be a world leader is to LET THE GIFTED KIDS WORK AT THEIR LEVEL. If they are held back, we hold back our country. These are the kids that will make scientific discoveries, innovate, invent, and solve world issues. Let them do it!
I hoped I’d hear from someone in one of the so-called “best” states. I really wondered what they were doing that was so great. The peer tutoring issue has been mentioned a lot lately and is quite troubling. It is a lot different than teaching children to help other students in a team or periodically as tutors. It’s using students, and parents need to let the principal know they disapprove. Thank you, Meg. I’m glad you brought this to everyone’s attention.
I also agree that in certain circumstances gifted students might work well in a self-contained class with a teacher credentialed in this area. They shouldn’t be forced into a class like this if they don’t like it, but some children might learn and progress better academically with other gifted students.
There is a debate here, I know.
While class size can be an issue, the number of levels within a class appears to be the actual problematic factor. If students are apportioned to classes via a method like cluster grouping, this can reduce the number of levels a teacher needs to differentiate for and allow time to differentiate for gifted learners.
A greater obstacle is the attitude of many educators towards gifted learners. Too many see students already proficient in academics for their grade level as less deserving of educational attention than struggling students and programs like NCLB, RttT, Common Core, and most teacher assessments have served to reinforce that by being proficiency-based and not growth-based. I’ve even heard teachers with a background in teaching gifted students refer to requiring a full year’s growth for gifted students as a ‘personal agenda’.
To me, most pull-out programs are meant to placate the parents of gifted students while ignoring that gifted students need acceleration. The gifted student is still stuck at the pace of the standard classroom, expected to do the same classwork, and either provided fluff or extra work. If pull-out programs were actually used to provide acceleration for students asynchronously gifted in one or two areas, that would be great, but I have yet to read about one that does that.
I had the opportunity to tour gifted magnet classrooms in Grosse Pointe, MI. The difference between those classrooms and those that use differentiation was astonishing. The gifted children were inspired to work to a higher level. Sticking out was an accomplishment, not a social blunder. While the classroom did not run like a well-oiled machine, the kids did. Each one got the gas (curriculum) and oil (instruction) they need to run at their own pace. It was a bit chaotic, but a phenomenally good chaos.
I very much enjoyed this article, particularly the part on advanced and AP classes, which I’m currently writing a blog entry about. However, I did have to disagree with the first sentence. All children have strengths and weaknesses. But not all children are gifted, no matter how many traits are considered. This is a platitude that I believe ultimately harms gifted individuals because the underlying message is one of utilitarian worth. It implies that to be gifted makes one worth more, so an nongifted individual would not have the same value, thus we need say every child is gifted so that they are equal. A person’s value comes from being a person, not because of their abilities or gifts. The pushback against gifted education is not because we can’t see differences, but because our society believes acknowledging someone’s superior abilities is acknowledging them as a superior person.
Thank you for your great post!
Thanks Joshua! I appreciate such a thoughtful post and you have an impressive Blog for gifted education! I can’t wait to explore it. I also very much like your take on gifted education.
There is so much talk about Common Core Standards, and standards in general, I like to emphasize the uniqueness of every student. Certainly, every person’s value comes from being a person, but I think I understand what you are saying. I will be thinking about this some more.
I student taught near Rochester! I visited the Roeper School back in the 70s on a field trip! My assignments included Hawthorn Center and Edgewood Elementary (3rd grade) which closed a long time ago.
Thanks again!
Well said, Joshua.
In regards to DE not having gifted programming, that is false. My children have all gone through the enrichment (GT) programs in DE, specifically Christina School District. My youngest daughter has made it to the district science fair finals for two years in a row, and has participated on a 24 team, as well as a Meaningful Economics team, through her enrichment classes. She is pulled out of class twice weekly to meet with other enrichment students in Math and Language Arts. While I wish her day was more focused around her advanced abilities, to say that there is no programming is a misconception. I will say that this programming falls short once they move from elementary into middle and high school, though.
That’s interesting, Lori. I obtained my information from the Davidson website. Here is what is said about DE and gifted programming http://www.davidsongifted.org/db/state_policy_delaware_10009.aspx. You might want to let them know what you told me. I’m wondering if your district has other funds or is different in some way from the rest of the state.
NYC has extensive gifted and talented programs and withiin those some are NYC, but schools in the burbs usually have an accelerated class starting aroundd second grade. These programs, I believe, are funded locally, nott by the state. The new mayor will probably try to get rid of these programs.
Thank you Bob! I double checked my source and for New York it seems the amount of funding is unknown, and perhaps you have some gifted programming at the local level. That would make sense. http://www.davidsongifted.org/db/state_policy_new_york_10035.aspx. I changed that sentence in my post.
Nancy,
Nice post. In TN my children were in pull out enrichment programs in elementary that were pretty good, but here in NC it was all pull out acceleration. It was ok for my daughter by for my son he was too disorganized to handle pullout. But in middle school they are in accelerated language arts and math classes which work pretty well. Both include a lot of project based learning. The only problem is the class sizes are quite large almost 40 children.For high school there is only one additional option – we have early college programs where the students are in accelerated high school for 2 year then start college in their junior year. There are also some good career education programs too where a student can get Microsoft certification or other certifications. IT could be better but it could be worse.
Thanks Janna! I’ve heard of the 2 year high school plan but didn’t know it was being implemented anywhere. All that you describe is interesting, especially comparing TN and NC.
I am thankful that we have self-contained G/T classes in 1/3rd of the elementary schools in our district in WA. Students are transported from the other schools to be part of the program and 99% of them are thriving.
A few of problems in WA– The teachers in those classrooms do not need to have special training. This has been an issue for us this year as our 4th grader has a teacher that has never taught G/T. The students aren’t learning as much because the teacher doesn’t grasp how quickly they comprehend. Beyond elementary school, the middle school program has just started “challenge” blocks in math, English, and history. Finally, each district has it’s own way of dealing with its G/T students. Some districts start in 2nd grade while others wait until 4th or 5th.
Thank you, Kim. Wow! Lacking gifted credentials for gifted teachers. I thought Washington was more progressive than that. How sad. And it is too bad they don’t have more consistency in their gifted programming. I guess at least they have something.
I’m writing again because I think that some commentators misunderstand what gifted children are like and what they need from their education. In addition to teaching at almost every grade level 1-12, I was an elementary and middle school principal for 25 years. Moreover, two of my own children scored very high on IQ tests. Officially, they were gifted, but that doesn’t mean they were good at everything at school. The courses they liked they did very well in; the others, not so much. Both of these boys went on to college and graduate school. One became a civil rights lawyer and the other a veterinarian. Because this second son wasn’t completely satisfied by vet work, he branched out into computers. He now runs his own business maintaining and upgrading computers for small businesses. Mostly, he is self-taught in this area.
One of the elementary schools where I was principal was in an upscale neighborhood. Many parents had important jobs; one of them was a university president. But our classes were made up of children of all abilities. What worked for our students were blended grade classrooms (,K-1, 2-3, 4-5), differentiated instruction, and lots of out of class opportunities to excel. (See my previous post about our noon hour program.) Our students had multiple ways of moving “up and out” without going into an accelerated math or science class. Some read books way beyond their grade level; others created new games for the playground and supervised them; some wrote poetry and/or short stories; and others read about science and did experiments. We also had many kids who created and acted in their own plays and even more who made original items to sell in the school store.
The middle school where I was principal was in a poor rural area. We had a few kids with high I.Q’s, but most of them were in the normal range. Still, our students had opportunities to grow and blossom. We had a school garden where kids not only planted, cared for, and harvested vegetables, but also experimented to find out what different types of soil, fertilizers, and amounts of sun would do for certain plants. We also adopted the 2 mile long road that went past our school and held regular clean-ups. The best thing we did for our kids was to create an in school jobs program. Students could apply for jobs that took 20 minutes a day, before or after school, during the noon recess,or when they had a study hall. They had to get letters of recommendation, undergo an interview, and be supervised by a faculty member once they were hired. They also had to sign-in and out and could be fired for being late or doing a poor job. Because the school could not afford to pay them with real money, we printed our own “Cottrell Bucks” that could be used for special events at school or exclusive field trips. However,the biggest draw for students was our yearly auction where they could bid on desirable items–anything from electronics, CD’s, sweatshirts and caps, to candy. As you might expect the kids who worked the most time had earned the most “bucks” and were able to bid on and win the most desirable items.
What I have been trying to demonstrate in this overly long post is that a school can provide many challenging and satisfying opportunities for gifted, ordinary, and disabled students students without labeling them and separating them from their peers. Outside of school all children and adults have to live and work with people who have different abilities, talents, and interests. They may even marry someone not quite as bright as they are and have children of ordinary ability. Shouldn’t their education teach them how to live productively and happily with those others?
Joanne, this sounds like a great set-up! Thanks for sharing. Have you outlined how this worked in any of your books or articles? I wish more schools could follow this design. It sounds like a win-win for all the students!
Joanne,
Are you saying that this school had limited opportunities for acceleration? It sounds like, with the exception of reading and the minor differentiation done in the standard classroom, that the students did not work at their own level and pace, but were instead given a greater breadth of activities.
As a gifted learner myself, I will say that my best experiences were acceleration-based. One year, four of us were given the opportunity to complete two years of math in one. We raced through those textbooks with time to spare. A year later, I was accelerated again in math and was now two years ahead. Unfortunately, I was never accelerated enough in math and always found it too easy until I hit a wall in college because I had no study skills for math and had never worked hard at it. I very much wish I had been accelerated in math quicker and higher.
My daughters are each one year accelerated in math and still find it too easy. I am hoping to make sure that history does not repeat itself.
In language arts, my teacher took a different tactic. The same four of us were allowed to finish the year’s worksheets early and then do book reports for the rest of the year. Unfortunately, that just meant that every year we were stuck doing material that was a few grade levels below where we were academically. It was not a good experience for us. It was extra work with little to no benefit.
Three quotes that I believe really emphasize the need for acceleration are
Unfortunately some people deny the fundamental role of acceleration in a program for the gifted. In so doing, they are in effect denying who and what defines the gifted at any stage of development – children who exhibit advanced intellectual development in one or more areas. – Joyce VanTassel-Baska, 1992
Adult surveys of gifted individuals reveal that they do not regret their acceleration. Rather, they regret not having accelerated more. – Lubinski, Webb, et al. (2001)
No other arrangements for gifted children works as well as acceleration – James A. Kulik, The University of Michigan
As far as living and working with those of different abilities, I find that the people I work with were all in the top 5-10% of their class and that most of my friends were too. Working and living with people of similar abilities would have been a much more valuable skill to learn. However, even in high school when I was in the honors and AP classes, I still had plenty of interaction with people of different abilities, talents, and interests through work, scouts, neighborhood friends, and immediate family.
If the schools did a better job educating gifted learners, I might feel differently, but the only schools in the area I see educating top students well are the ones that have magnet programs or are gifted-only. Too often the regular schools offer social reasons to not accelerate gifted students and I believe do more harm than good in doing that.
I studied gifted education during my time at University, and taught many different grade levels and subjects during my time as a contract teacher. My favorite year was one where I was hired to replace the gifted ed teacher in an Oregon school district. She was going on a one year leave. She had done extensive research on best practices, and had designed the program on her own, with substantial support from the school district and some very committed parents.
What a fantastic program that was! It was a rural district, with four small grade schools. Students from two of the schools attended all day Mondays and Wednesdays, and students from the other two schools attended all day Tuesdays and Thursdays. Fridays were set aside for the teacher to plan and prepare lessons, and attend workshops on gifted education. There was a committee of district administrators and parents, along with the teacher, who met monthly to offer support and help administer the program. The district business manager oversaw the budget, and the teacher was allowed a generous amount of money to order materials for the program.
Gifted children are different in a number of ways from the general population, and that does not mean they are superior. They do have different needs, however, and one of the things they really need to do is be together, at least part of their time in school. That way they do not feel the discrimination that happens, or the constant feeling that they are “weird” because they think differently and react differently to the world.
The curriculum was thorough, but students were not pushed to simply do more work or advanced work. They did a major project, they had classes in Spanish, poetry, history of English, art, and computers (at that time, the programming language of Logo) Gifted students were identified using a number of criteria, including teacher observations and referral, self referral, and student portfolios, in addition to IQ. IQ was not necessarily the determining factor, although it was included in the rating for identification. It’s so sad that gifted education has not been considered important, because those children are at high risk for drug and alcohol use, dropping out of school, crime, and suicide. They really need consideration and attention, and of course, challenge.
Thank you, Mary. It sounds like these students had a part-time program and that you had a great deal of support which is critical. I like that you said “Gifted children are different in a number of ways from the general population, and that does not mean they are superior.”
Oklahoma may be fully funded (there is nearly $1000 per child allotted IF they are identified as gifted) HOWEVER, they don’t dictate how that will be spent. For example in 7th grade our gifted child was not given any special consideration besides “extra worksheets if she wants them” and the “gifted program” for the year was a trip to the zoo- just like they take the grade school on.
Hi Marna, That sounds so unfair. Do you have a parent group to connect with? It certainly doesn’t sound like a gifted program. But thanks for sharing. Other parents have difficulties too and it might help them to see they are not alone.