Gifted programs, lack of, in DC

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Where well-heeled PTAs pony up for teachers aides, or pay for enough stuff so that schools can afford them past K (e.g. at Janney, Murch and Brent) gifted elementary school kids are increasingly pulled out for enrichment systematically."

Not true at Janney. The advanced kids are offered the option of doing more challenging homework, and have the opportunity on certain assignments/projects to do more work, but there aren't pull outs for the advanced kids.

And differentiation is far different from gifted education, and it doesn't ensure that all kids' needs are being met.

Agreed. I have 3 kids at Janney and there are not routine pull outs for advanced kids. Kids have been given more difficult spelling words or math work to do but that's about it. However, this serves the population just fine because 75% of the kids at the school
are those that would have been identified as "gifted and talented" in a large suburban school district like Fairfax which identifies something like 20% of the kids as "gifted".
At Janney every parent I know was an overachiever themselves and were in some sort of gifted and talented program. Their offspring are very bright and have had every advantage from birth on. Of the dozen so Janney kids i know who took the WIPSI at age 4/5 (with thoughts of maybe going to private school),
all were within the 95-99.9% range. We laugh on my block because all 6 Janney kids were tested in the 99% (we laugh because certainly these tests are highly susceptible).
Anyway, that all said, I don't know a single Janney kid who I'd truly consider "gifted" or a prodigy. You know the "doing advanced Algebra in second grade" type. These kids (who would really need a gifted program) are exceedingly rare---probably less than 10 per grade level in DC or even less than that.
It would seem a bit extreme to start an entire school to serve less than 100 kids city wide. For better or worse, what you have at Janney or other NWDC public elementary schools ARE "gifted programs" if gifted means what it has come to mean in most districts-----"very bright kids working a few grade levels ahead but not extreme academic prodigies".

If 75% of the kids would be identified as "gifted and talented" they are not truly G&T.


My point exactly (Janney poster here).
Janney and 98% of gifted and talented programs in the US are simply filled with "very bright/capable of working several grade levels ahead kids".
Truly "gifted and talented" is a very rare bird and there are likely less than 10 kids per grade in DC. More likely less than 5.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is frustrating that pull outs in DC seem to focus on kids who are behind rather than those that are ahead.

Not the experience at our elementary school (Hearst). While those who are behind are getting pullouts, many of the kids who are ahead are getting pullouts as well to give them more challenging work. In fact, some have been concerned that the advanced kids are being pulled out too much.

But is that 3 kids in a whole class of 20+ or how many advanced kids getting pulled out?

And may I ask why anyone would be worried the advanced kids were being pulled out too much? (honest question!) For how many hours a week are they being pulled out? Is it the parents of the advanced kids that are worried or other parents?

Thanks!

NP here, but in-class differentiation thrives at our upper NW ES, too. In ELA and math there's a combination of full-class instruction and ability-based small group work. Usually 4-5 groups per class (of 20 or so), rotating through stations (including work with the teacher or an aide). One of my kids is advanced in math and the other in ELA, and both have been appropriately challenged throughout their ES years.

I grew up in a traditional tracked gifted program, and I think the in-class differentiation approach is superior. It keeps kids in heterogeneous classes and allows for fluid regrouping, which I think is huge--it allows teachers to respond to what they're seeing over time and doesn't consign kids to rigid tracks. My math kid has moved from the highest small group to independent work (when he was working ahead of the group on a particular unit) and back to the small group again. The teacher has the flexibility to make these changes in real-time.

The huge caveat is that the success of the in-class approach is completely dependent on a strong principal and teaching staff--the principal has to believe in it and create consistency in how teachers are applying the model. I recognize that this is not happening at most DCPS schools and that many kids are not being challenged appropriately. But I'd much rather see DCPS focus on implementing effective in-class differentiation at all schools than spend resources creating a gifted track that simply sucks out the "smart"/well-prepped kids.

I think the key thing here is you are in an upper NW school where the difference in the classroom are less stark then in an EoTP school where gentrification is happening. You truly have kids 1-2 grades levels in the same class with kids who are reading 2 grade levels behind. It takes a lot more than small group differentiaton to deal with that. Its shocking how many 9th graders in DC read at an elementary school level. Because they have been passed from grade to grade without any real focused or tracked help for them when they needed it most-in early elementary school. If my kid was at Janney I wouldnt worry about tracking. We are EoTP though and the differences in ability are shocking and sad. They become painfully evident by 2nd grade. This is also when more behvairoral problems creep into the classrrom. thus, the high SES flight from the school if that is an option. In DC, its not even so much about being gifted. The sad fact is that if your kid is proficient at GRADE LEVEL they are already ahead of 70% of their peers. I don't know if the solution is pulling out the gifted kids or the struggling kids, but its just unrealistic to think these two groups with such a significant learning gap can learn effectively in one class together.

NOpe. Murch has the full gamut in each class. Yes, a larger portion is advanced, but all of my kids' classes have always included kids needing below-grade-level support. I'm not saying it's easy, and I know that it's going to be easier in a school where the balance of kids are on the proficient/advanced side than the non-proficient side. But it can be done. It just hasn't been tried or executed effectively at most schools.

[Anonymous]

I've thought about this some more and I stand by my statement that Janney's population is about 75% kids who would be admitted to a traditional, suburban district's Gifted and Talented program (which would admit about the top 20% of the cross section of kids). They're very bright and very capable of working several grade levels ahead but not prodigies.
Unfortunately the price of admission to this G&T program is the ability to afford to buy/rent a million dollar house in AU Park. Which is ALL sorts of wrong, I agree 100%. Unlike traditional school districts you can't test in, you must buy in to this peer group in DC. And for many if you can't afford (or chose not to) buy in, many Charter schools fulfill the same purpose of self-segregation by academic talent/ambition.

[Anonymous]

So does Janney offer supports for the 25% that are not reading two grade levels ahead?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So does Janney offer supports for the 25% that are not reading two grade levels ahead?

yes, they have all sorts of intervention specialists.
Those kids are pulled out extensively.
Many parents pay teachers to tutor privately after school as well.

[Anonymous]

Is it really 20% of kids in AAP in fairfax county? Where are you getting this 20% of kids number 11:20?

Also, why on earth do you assume everyone in AU Park with a graduate degree is smarter than everyone in the suburbs to get this idea that all of AU Park would be in the top 20% of say MoCo or Fairfax? They have plenty of million+ homes there as well you know. Seems off base.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is it really 20% of kids in AAP in fairfax county? Where are you getting this 20% of kids number 11:20?

Also, why on earth do you assume everyone in AU Park with a graduate degree is smarter than everyone in the suburbs to get this idea that all of AU Park would be in the top 20% of say MoCo or Fairfax? They have plenty of million+ homes there as well you know. Seems off base.

Because you have SOME sort of economic diversity in the suburbs, even in wealthier areas.
In AU park you have NONE--it is such a tiny area. I don't know a SINGLE person who isn't college educated. Not one. Come to think of it, not a single person who doesn't have a graduate degree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is it really 20% of kids in AAP in fairfax county? Where are you getting this 20% of kids number 11:20?

Also, why on earth do you assume everyone in AU Park with a graduate degree is smarter than everyone in the suburbs to get this idea that all of AU Park would be in the top 20% of say MoCo or Fairfax? They have plenty of million+ homes there as well you know. Seems off base.

it was 17% in 2013. Likely more now.
This is typical of many suburban districts.
All "bright" kids are "gifted".

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/time-to-rethink-fairfaxs-gifted-program/2013/06/21/bb5baf58-d9e6-11e2-9df4-895344c13c30_story.html

[Anonymous]

And in Montgomery county the gifted are 37%!

http://www.bethesdamagazine.com/Bethesda-Magazine/September-October-2012/The-Gifted-Left-Behind/?cparticle=2&siarticle=1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And in Montgomery county the gifted are 37%!

http://www.bethesdamagazine.com/Bethesda-Magazine/September-October-2012/The-Gifted-Left-Behind/?cparticle=2&siarticle=1

Isn't Montgomery County like Lake Woebegone? All the children are above average.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not remotely "understandable;" no, utterly myopic. If DC wants to dramatically improve its fraught public school system, it needs to woo and retain high SES parents in droves by dangling carrots before them. Better support for advanced learners across the board is a sop they'd go for.

And who is going to lead the charge for a (majority white) test-in school when DCPS can't get the majority of kids at grade level and commit political suicide?

Woo high SES parents? They already send their kids to private schools.

Yep. Gentrification can't come soon enough. Let's see what the city looks like in 10 years

In 10 years, PG will truly be DC's "Ward 9."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And in Montgomery county the gifted are 37%!

http://www.bethesdamagazine.com/Bethesda-Magazine/September-October-2012/The-Gifted-Left-Behind/?cparticle=2&siarticle=1

But the "gifted" services are only available for 3-4% of the kids in MoCo (Highly Gifted Centers in ES, Magnet middle/HS) The "gifted" designation isn't used for anything.

[Anonymous]

One problem that a few people are hinting at but not highlighting is that there is an extreme gap in parental educational achievement in DC.

DC has EXTREMELY high numbers of advanced degree holders, educational overachievers and formerly gifted students. Throw a brick and you'll hit a parent who was a high school valedictorian, a national merit scholar or someone who got a 1400 on the SAT at 12. These are primarily among the elites - newcomers, not black/poor, but there are plenty of them in our city. In contrast with many cities it's actually kind of striking that among the white parent population you have very, very few people who are not educational overachievers (go to Baltimore or Philly for example to compare).

By contrast, among the poor black population, whose children are the majority in our school systems, school achievement is a reflection of the failure of urban education systems along with all aspects of urban services and life in DC for decades, much as it has been in many American cities.

Children's educational outcomes, per research, seem to take parental achievement as a starting point. It's a sad thing for a country that believes in bootstraps and inequality being a mindset, etc., but it's real.

So we have a situation where if DC were normed against the rest of the country, we'd have divergent cohorts of children: many very likely to fit into the top 20%, many very likely to sit in the bottom 20%, and practically no one in the middle.

What approach to that is educationally appropriate, democratic, egalitarian, or best for our future is hard to say. I am not the person who has settled how to Make America Great Again or Finally Great or Whatever (though I'm pretty sure it doesn't involve a Wall in Texas).

BUT I believe generally that our rich kids are gonna be OK. Ward 3 is not going down the tubes. I am not going to care about gifted education - my kids are going to get jobs at some point, and they might even do good things with their lives. It's going to happen.

What I don't want to see any more is kids who aren't educable to a level that can see them employed and living with self-respect. Those kids are opportunities we are throwing away at every poorly educated grade, and honestly these are the people who are going to smoke their lives away, misdirect their energy toward misguided notions of masculinity and authenticity like crime, and hold DC back when we should be a powerhouse regionally and worldwide. We all know this stuff, but we think about our own kids and their 6th grade algebra class first.

I'm just asking that everybody widen their horizons a little.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Where well-heeled PTAs pony up for teachers aides, or pay for enough stuff so that schools can afford them past K (e.g. at Janney, Murch and Brent) gifted elementary school kids are increasingly pulled out for enrichment systematically."

Not true at Janney. The advanced kids are offered the option of doing more challenging homework, and have the opportunity on certain assignments/projects to do more work, but there aren't pull outs for the advanced kids.

And differentiation is far different from gifted education, and it doesn't ensure that all kids' needs are being met.

Agreed. I have 3 kids at Janney and there are not routine pull outs for advanced kids. Kids have been given more difficult spelling words or math work to do but that's about it. However, this serves the population just fine because 75% of the kids at the school
are those that would have been identified as "gifted and talented" in a large suburban school district like Fairfax which identifies something like 20% of the kids as "gifted".
At Janney every parent I know was an overachiever themselves and were in some sort of gifted and talented program. Their offspring are very bright and have had every advantage from birth on. Of the dozen so Janney kids i know who took the WIPSI at age 4/5 (with thoughts of maybe going to private school),
all were within the 95-99.9% range. We laugh on my block because all 6 Janney kids were tested in the 99% (we laugh because certainly these tests are highly susceptible).
Anyway, that all said, I don't know a single Janney kid who I'd truly consider "gifted" or a prodigy. You know the "doing advanced Algebra in second grade" type. These kids (who would really need a gifted program) are exceedingly rare---probably less than 10 per grade level in DC or even less than that.
It would seem a bit extreme to start an entire school to serve less than 100 kids city wide. For better or worse, what you have at Janney or other NWDC public elementary schools ARE "gifted programs" if gifted means what it has come to mean in most districts-----"very bright kids working a few grade levels ahead but not extreme academic prodigies".

If 75% of the kids would be identified as "gifted and talented" they are not truly G&T.

What's "truly G&T"? Are MoCo and Fairfax identifying "truly G&T"? Or just bright/working well above grade level? Because what PP is saying is that in a school like Janney, most of the kids are working above grade level, and many score in the 95th+ percentile when tested. That doesn't make them "gifted."

I think MoCo does; it pulls the top 3-4% out, and it only gets more selective as it goes along. In a county with as many smart well educated kids as MoCo has, pulling the top 3-4% is going to be a VERY smart kids. Fairfax is closer to 20%; obviously a very different program and probably not for the "gifted".

[Anonymous]

I think this conversation, which is very interesting to me, given that I work for DCPS, shows (at least some) of the reasons why we don't invest in a traditional GT program. There's better ways to meet the needs of our advanced students. Clearly, though, every model (from our focus on high quality differentiation augmented with SEM when possible) to a traditional GT program that many on here clamor for, have pros and cons.