On Demand
Gifted and Talented
Monday, June 23, 2008
Pamela Wheaton, Director of Inside Schools, and Judith Amaro, a parent leader in District 6, join us to discuss the City's school admission policy change and how it has affected diversity in gifted and talented programs.
Read the gifted and talented blog posts at InsideSchools.org
- About the Brian Lehrer Show »
- Staff Bios »
- Contact Us »
- Tapes and Transcripts »
- Latest Episode »
- Show Archive »
Features & Series
Podcast
Stay up to date.
Subscribe to the Podcast
YOU PRODUCE The Brian Lehrer Show
Be a listener-producer with facts, questions and people you'd like to hear on the air.
More
The Brian Lehrer Show Scrapbook
Visit the scrapbook for daily photos and miscellany from The Brian Lehrer Show.
More
Shop at Amazon!
The Brian Lehrer Show picks
Start your Amazon shopping on WNYC.org and a portion of your total purchase goes to WNYC.
More
Comments
Refresh
Just a comment in advance to say that, as a kid growing up in Brooklyn in the late-1950s and early 1960s, G&T (then called "Special progress) classes not only helped me progress academically, but also probably prevented me from losing my mind. Even though I was tracked in the highest track, at age nine I was unable to sit still or keep quiet in class for more than 10 minutes, not because I was "hyper-active" (although that would be today's diagnosis), but because I was bored out of my skull.
An assistant principal (Hi, Mr. Garner, if you're still around) figured this out and permitted me to leave the room and hang out in his office after I'd finished my classwork (since this post is "anonymous," I will admit that I'd complete a one hour assignment in ten minutes.) The following year, I was placed in "SP," and skipped the 8th grade -- I'd already skipped the 2nd grade, but the problem wasn't merely level and content, but also the pace of instruction.
I am from a working-class background; my parents could not have afforded private school. Gifted kids have special needs. they cannot be placed in mainstream classes, and gifted classes have to remain selective. I'd have been basket class -- my parents would have been as well -- had I not been removed from the "mainstream."
I want to add that computers and multi-tasking were a gift from god to people like me -- we're not deficient in attention or "easily distracted -- we just run on multiple tracks. Right now, I am working re my full-time job, listening to Brian, and (because I'm telecommuting today due to the expected storms) doing laundry and keeping an eye on the plumber. God bless technology.
It's really remarkable how much attention the G&T process gets--and we have a child at NEST, so this is not sour grapes--when the vast majority of kids are not in G&T. Kinda a shame.
Also--standardized testing inevitably creates less diversity--how Mr. Klein could ignore this speaks to his hubris.
How many of the Students taking these tests were held back and are taking them for a second time?!
There is no reason to promote 'diversity' in our gifted program. it should strictly be merit based, otherwise what are we doing exactly with this program? if you are not qualified for the program than we are just promoting mediocrity in instead of promoting academics. This push for some ideal diversity seems to blinds everyone - by the way, I am not white, so please don't use that as a talking point.
My children are in a G&T program on the UWS. Prior to the recent admission changes (3 sets of changes in 3 years), the program was really diverse, a factor everyone liked so much about it. Since the DOE changes, the program has gotten much less diverse. Last year the program was even criticized by the West Side Spirit paper for lack of diversity, despite the fact that the school no longer had any control over admissions. I don't understand why the Klein administration is given so much credit - I have seen nothing but deterioration.
By the way, Insideschools is a great organization - they should be running the schools!!
Are the teachers putting too much pressure on the students because they are so worried about losing their jobs?
Education includes a wide variety of areas in a curriculum, art, literature, physical education, how to write and grammar and civics need to be part of the education our children are getting.
Test scores are definately not the only indicator of gifted and talented!!
Testing is important. You can't improve schools if you don't measure performance.
Its a catch 22, testing improves accountability, but accountability emphasizes teaching to the test.
the numbers have been fudged. the tests were made easier. the nyc school system is a joke and does not compete with the rest of the world. what happened to just educating the kids? the only way i would send my kids to a nyc public school would be if i had access to a time machine and could send them back to 1955. pathetic, new york, pathetic
CTR, same here -- SP classes were a saving grace that got me away from idiot co-students and idiot teachers. However, there was no lack of cheating on the part of the teachers to keep their numbers up, and I suspect this was the case throughout the system. They were all afraid of losing their SP classes if they didn't maintain a quota of students that qualified. Same for AP classes.
There is a big problem with teachers cheating to hold on to their grade averages in the face of cutbacks based on low performance.
If teachers were better, better salaries and pensions could be offered to them, and then perhaps they would remain independent of such pressures. But as it is, many teachers in the system are just "nice" people who think they're helping, but aren't really very good at teaching. It's the teaching profession that needs reform.
We hear so much about how kids are just being prepared for tests. I have a hard time understanding what is a practical result of this? Rather than a theoretical result of what might happen, how can we observe this effect? How can we see a real result of the negative effect of preparing kids for tests?
Test prep is NOT the same thing as focusing on basics or narrowing the curriculum.
Test prep is about teaching kids how to take particular tests.
* Teaching them the format of the tests.
* How to fill in bubbles
* How to be mindful of timing to get to all the easy ones.
* How to answer questions in the style of the testing company.
* Other test specific things.
It is is NOT:
* Teaching basic concepts so that the can be broadly applied.
* Teaching depth, in place of breadth.
* Teaching breadth, in place of depth.
Test prep is just about the tests.
diversity is the wrong goal. the class is not called "a bunch of diverse kids" it is called gifted and talented. there for it should have the gifted and talented regaurdless of skin color, background, etc
If the G & T threshold had to be lowered, yet the standardized test scores are supposedly higher, doesn't that suggest that the standardized test HAS been made easier?
All children are "Gifted and Talented" if they are well taught. Not all of them will have the same strengths or weaknesses, and if there was a greater focus on sharing the Best Practices of successful institutions, there would be a far greater opportunities for all of our children.
Brian,
Let's stop the BS. Many educators know that these results are artificial. First, instruction is done away for test prep and then most malignant and dishonest is that now a days many PRINCIPALS exert pressure on the teachers to improve these grades. In years to to come this will be exposed as a big scandal - it seems that everyone now is just burying their head.
Why don't you do a show on how cheating is creating a false vision of how the schools ar?e doing
I see nothing wrong with being prepared for a test. Frankly, that should be a minimum requirement, not the main goal. In real life, we are all faced with arbitrary tests in the form of stupid jobs, applications, etc. If you can't pass a test, you've got a problem! Most tests have the same structure, I noticed while in school.
Once I mastered the test process, I was able to concentrate on the more interesting side of my education (as slim as THAT was).
All students should know how to pass tests: it shows they understand how to work in a system, which is the bare minimum of functioning well in any civilization.
I am a parent of kids in public schools. We have tons of art, music etc--it is mandated by law to have an arts curriculum, so if this woman says she doesn't see it happening in her school--she could just ask. Frankly, i prefer that testing be used to evaluate what is happening in the classroom. I dont care if some test prep happens--rather have that than no accountability, which as we all know will lead to horrible schools and the kids that suffer most are the poor kids. Be careful of what you ask for.
Do other countries such as Sweden or Finland, countries with better systems of education use these standardized tests?
The workplace isn't really filled with "Test Like" situations. These tests do nothing but enrich the companies that produce the tests and create statistics to indicate some sort of false progress in education for the administration that instituted them. Instead of investing in more schools and better teachers we have crippled education with these ridiculous tests.
Gifted and Talented programs are great and needed. There is nothing worse than not being challenged at school. The name has got to go though. Isn't everyone gifted and talented in the US? There is a need for accelerated and specialized learning but don't stigmatize the other students with an unfortunate name.
1) The economy of the city will never be this good again. This is likely the best you will see.
2) There has been a large influx of upper class asians whites into the city. That is most likely the reason for improved schools.
3) Gifted and Talented means Parents that have the time to devote to their kids. It also means kids that can behave themselves, and if they get into a fight will not seriously injure each other.
I moved to the US in middle school. I asked to be placed in a Gifted and Talented program, but I did not do too well on the math tests simply because I had not been exposed to a pre-algebra program, and because my English skills were not up to par just yet.
Based on the interview (and the fact that I asked, I think), they placed me in an algebra class in 7th grade, anyway. It took me a while to catch up, but I later did just fine. If I had not been accepted to the Gifted and Talented program despite my low scores, I would not have been on track later on to get into AP classes, get into an elite school, eventually get my Ph.D. from MIT. In my case, I'm so grateful they didn't rely solely on standardized exam scores.
These programs are racist and disadvantaged.
During the busing years, white children were bussed into minority neighborhoods and all put into the same class, called T & G. The only other compromise that white parents would accept was that all minority students bussed into their white schools, would all be put into one calss, and called, "Special Ed". T & G was invented to please white parents, period.
G & T classes are much more necessary now in the era of No Child Left Behind than they were when I went to NYC Public School. There is so much focus on "basics" these days that children who come into school already knowing how to read are tormented by years of "teaching" which does nothing for them. Why is it considered democratic to deny meaningful instruction to the more advanced students?
Sally,
if yohink it is racismur welfare check does not arrive on time you t
I totally disagree with your guests that getting rid of Gifted and Talented programs is a good idea, specifically so that there will be more diversity, and students can learn from each other. I grew up taking Honors classes, and later AP classes, that were admittedly not "diverse" in terms of race or income level at all, but I turned out just fine! In fact, my ability to focus on my learning at a higher level meant that later in life, I had the eeducational tools to want to seek out diversity and learn about others on my own. I think it's ridiculous to think a fast-learning, more intellectually gifted kid is going to "learn" from a slow one. Seems like a recipe for resentment, not learning.
Immigrant kids such as CS are special cases whose skills may not initially be measurable on standard tests due to the fact that they are not native English-speakers.
I do not think, however, that "all kids are gifted and talented if properly taught," assuming that you define gifted in terms of the ability to process information quickly and readily master complex concepts. I know that, in my family, my sister and I were academically gifted while several of our cousins, who had many other talents and abilities, were not. G&T is for kids who are fast learners with significant math and verbal aptitude. I would like to see a more diverse G&T, but I do not think that the needs of academically gifted kids should be ignored or that the differences should be reduced to the effects of teaching skills. I was different. Without G&T, I'd have been unmanageable and miserable. Politics should not govern education.
Thanks for the compliment to Insideschools.org Andrea, but we are just a small non-profit working for the benefit of all NYC public school students -- and just like WNYC, we rely on the generosity of New Yorkers who rely on us! Here's a link for you or anyone else who may be interested in donating: https://insideschools.org/home/membership/donate_now.php
Thanks for the compliment, Andrea, but Insideschools.org is a small non-profit - and just like WNYC, we rely on the support of New Yorkers who rely on us. Here's a link to donate online if anyone is interested: https://insideschools.org/home/membership/donate_now.php
I wish teachers could consistently differentiate curriculum to address students at all levels, but when a student enters K with mastery of more than 50% of the skills required for entrance into first grade, you are banking on a very skilled and creative teacher who can address that child's needs and if you have one for K, you may not have the same luck for the next grades. Just as a student who is way below the mean and far behind may not be well served in a general ed. classroom, a student equally far above the mean and ahead is similarly poorly suited for that classroom. There is a reason G and T is under the umbrella of special education: a child who is clearly G and T has special needs. Such students need teachers who are trained in the cognitive, social and emotional development issues that G and T kids typically face; the programs offer some hope that students will consistently have teachers who know how to teach them. Teachers all have their hearts in the right place, I hope, but not all know how to effectively differentiate/compact curriculum and many get little to no professional development/exposure to best practices.
A parent, DOE teacher, and G and T kid back in the day.
I don't believe there are that many truly gifted children. A lot of smart ones, but not that many gifted.
some high achieving students need to be challenged at a higher degree
Leave a Comment
Please stay on topic, be civil, and be brief.
Back to EpisodeEmail addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments. Names are displayed with all comments. WNYC reserves the right to edit any comments posted on this site. Please read the WNYC.org Comment Guidelines before posting.