Aren't the tests supposed to be protected, copyrighted materials, which are only supposed to be released to and used by properly licensed and credentialed professionals? And wouldn't someone abusing their professional license in order to facilitate or run a test prep clinic based on the test likely face serious sanctions like losing their license - and potentially legal action like lawsuit? |
So what? When I assign Macbeth to read some of my students tell me they have read it 3 times. I guess your solution is to put the kid and their parents in jail then? |
Yes. Now prove it. |
Posters have already alleged this happens all the time. So those posters are the ones who supposedly have the information. If they know it to be true, then they should be acting on it and going after the bad actors, rather than whining about it on DCUM and trying to use it as a backhanded argument for invalidating G&T programs. |
Knowing it to be true and proving it are two different things. A kid tells you he has practiced on the test. Is FCPS really going to hire detectives to pursue this? Really? |
If you can't prove it then you can't really know it to be true either. |
When a first grader says this is the same test, I tend to believe her. |
How do you know that they are not. Do they have an average IQ? The opposite of gifted is not abnormal. |
Same test as what? You are administering IQ tests to first graders? |
I think we're too hung up on "gifted." But yes, I'm tired of hearing about it. Every kid who scores well at school is not gifted or even advanced. That used to be called "doing well."
There is so much more to a child than their IQ and test scores. |
So very true. |
Sure there is. But you say it as though it's a bad thing, as though IQ were a bad thing, somehow taking as though people think it's the be all or end all (which nobody does) or alternately like it's somehow taking something away from the overall school experience (which it doesn't). 30% of the class might be working their little butts off and "doing well" and getting A's and that's fine and good. But 3-5% of the class could be doing even better, and potentially moving on to even more advanced and difficult material and still be "doing well". 3-5% of the class might be able to get A's with their eyes closed and are actually bored to tears while the others struggle and work hard for their A's. It's not about prestige or recognition, nobody gets a gold medal for IQ - it's about challenging students at an appropriate level of difficulty. Once people understand that, they no longer have the opinion that you do. |
And, teachers were challenging the "extra smart" for years before the GT program. Even in a GT program, it may surprise you to know that some are significantly more gifted than others. |
First off, some of the tests are not IQ but are what are called School Ability Index tests. IQ tests like the WISC are supposed to be given by a licensed psychologist and are generally only used for special education identification (not gifted screening). Most school systems don't use these because they are costly to administer. Instead school systems purchase tests like the Naglieri, the OLSAT, etc which aren't quite the same thing. These tests are available online, just google it. |
A handful were. Most weren't. Most teachers can't effectively differentiate in class and basically just teach to the middle and basically ignore the top and bottom performers. |