Why obsess over getting into gifted program?

[Anonymous]

As one poster has already commented: Phelps was the fastest swimmer (and most gifted and talented) at the young age of 8. I'm sure this fact did not stop his Coach, his mom and him from training and preparing hard for the next "mickey mouse" short course meet/event. Gifted (and nongifted) students are no different and should be encouraged by their teachers and parents to work hard, prep and train for the next test, exam or exercise.

[Anonymous]

This thread needs to be renamed ''Michael Phelps and His Impact on Gifted Education in Virginia "

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
No, no one is saying Phelps would be where he is without hard work and that he wasted his time. What is being said is that his hard work would only get him so far without talent and the correct body type. Most of the rest of us do not compete with Michael Phelps. We can certainly enjoy swimming but we will never reach his level. That is why most of us don't have numerous Olympic medals hanging on our walls.

The problem is that we cannot determine with certainty who will be the next Michael Phelps of physics using a standard test in second grade. As oppose to body size and shape that cannot be drastically changed naturally no matter how hard one tries, human brain is quite elastic and does change when properly worked. The idea that only kids with raw talent in early ages need to be in an advanced academic environment is counter productive.

[Anonymous]

No the thread should be renamed: In Virginia, why are "gifted and talented" athletes are extolled for prep and work ethic but "gifted and talented" students are chastised for similar prep and work ethic?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:AAP to TJ to UVA. Once heard it was akin to winning the lottery.[/quote

Only UVA? I heard that's basically backup plan for TJ students.

It is not the back-up plan for the majority. It's a sure thing for many and note they do not mass migrate to VA TECH. The state school with more engineering.

[Anonymous]

The problem is that we cannot determine with certainty who will be the next Michael Phelps of physics using a standard test in second grade. As oppose to body size and shape that cannot be drastically changed naturally no matter how hard one tries, human brain is quite elastic and does change when properly worked. The idea that only kids with raw talent in early ages need to be in an advanced academic environment is counter productive.

I agree. Therefore all young athletes and students should be encouraged to prep, train and work hard at their crafts by parents, coaches and teachers. No one knows who the next Bill Gates or Phelps will be in 20 years. I could care less if this prep is for Saturday's mini-meet or the AAP. How relatively low or high the "imaginary bar" is set is immaterial.

[Anonymous]

No one is arguing againg intellectual enrichment. What people are arguing is that prepping for a specific test does not increase anything beyond the test score on that test.

The AAP tests are used based on the assumption that there was no prep. They are scaled that way. If the kids prep, then a different scaling will be required. In effect FCPS is doing that by downweighting the tests relative to the GBRS.

[Anonymous]

No, no one is saying Phelps would be where he is without hard work and that he wasted his time. What is being said is that his hard work would only get him so far without talent and the correct body type. Most of the rest of us do not compete with Michael Phelps. We can certainly enjoy swimming but we will never reach his level. That is why most of us don't have numerous Olympic medals hanging on our walls

The problem here (as a previous poster correctly asserts) is no one can predict who the next Phelps will be (even if you have the biggest hands, feet, body habitus, height and love of water at the age of 8). The game must be played out to the end since no one yet has crystal balls. This is the best argument for encouraging hard work and preparation early in youth regardless of the 'labels' or anthropometric measurements bestowed on the zygote, infant or child.

Easy to claim in hindsight with 19 medals dangling around his long neck!

[Anonymous]

No one is arguing againg intellectual enrichment. What people are arguing is that prepping for a specific test does not increase anything beyond the test score on that test.

The AAP tests are used based on the assumption that there was no prep. They are scaled that way. If the kids prep, then a different scaling will be required. In effect FCPS is doing that by downweighting the tests relative to the GBRS.

Please cite official definitions and references for this statement before passing gas.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No one is arguing againg intellectual enrichment. What people are arguing is that prepping for a specific test does not increase anything beyond the test score on that test.

The AAP tests are used based on the assumption that there was no prep. They are scaled that way. If the kids prep, then a different scaling will be required. In effect FCPS is doing that by downweighting the tests relative to the GBRS.

I disagree. Extensive prepping for a test could strengthen neural pathways in the brain. This could potentially lead to the development of a better conceptual understanding of the topic being studied. See (http://www.sciencemag.org/content/331/6018/772.abstract) for further elaboration on this.

[Anonymous]

No one is arguing againg intellectual enrichment. What people are arguing is that prepping for a specific test does not increase anything beyond the test score on that test.

The AAP tests are used based on the assumption that there was no prep. They are scaled that way. If the kids prep, then a different scaling will be required. In effect FCPS is doing that by downweighting the tests relative to the GBRS.

If AAP means Advanced Academic Placement in Fairfax County I do not find in any of the regulations that advanced academic preparation for specific tests through a host of mecahnisms (years of private tutoring in reading, writing and mathematics, kumon [reading and math], taking SSAT, Explore, SCAT or other types of tests for fun, practise or prep, CTY, EPGY, NUMATS, DUKE-TIPS, Khan and other online courses, attending after school and weekend Jewish, Russian, Korean, Chinese, Indian schools for intense academic enrichment and preparation) are prohibited, forbidden or frowned upon.

I would suspect any of these combination of activities performed in the same manner our young athletes train will results in advance academic performance and improve scores on any specific aptitude or ability test designed for admission to AAP or Advanced Academic Placement programs in Fairfax County.

Please point me to official guidelines prohibiting any of these types of activities. Rejoinders such as "prepping for a specific test" sound vague, nuanced and BS when engaging in many of the enumerated activities is way more than "prepping for a specific test". The other types of activities subsume any "specific test preparation" at the elementary or middle school level.

[Anonymous]

I disagree. Extensive prepping for a test could strengthen neural pathways in the brain. This could potentially lead to the development of a better conceptual understanding of the topic being studied. See (http://www.sciencemag.org/content/331/6018/772.abstract) for further elaboration on this.

Precisely, this hypothesis here partly explains why even the most "naturally gifted and talented athletes" like Phelps train and prep hard, over and over and over, even for low bar mini-swim meets at an early age (training the neuro-skeleto-muscular axis/pathways and cardiorespiratory axis/pathways) to improve speed. Some housewifes, lawyers and pseudo-scientists here have no appreciation for the similarity and plasticity of mind and muscle or brain and body.

In many biological systems the "weakest" or "least biochemically" endowed stand the MOST to gain by longstanding training and preparation of body and mind at an early age. The earlier the better. But, that's for another discussion.

[Anonymous]

I disagree. Extensive prepping for a test could strengthen neural pathways in the brain. This could potentially lead to the development of a better conceptual understanding of the topic being studied. See (http://www.sciencemag.org/content/331/6018/772.abstract) for further elaboration on this.

If this is true, this strategy, intuitively, seems an excellent approach for all children. Why do many Americans see a downside here? Is there also a "blind" and "irrational" divide on issues of child health and improving academic performance (and later better and more opportunities as adults) along party lines in this country?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This thread needs to be renamed ''Michael Phelps and His Impact on Gifted Education in Virginia "

[Anonymous]

Everyone feeling better yet?