G&T New Food for Thought

[Anonymous]

Given how often this issue comes up. I thought others may find this of interest.

Why gifted education may not be a smart idea
FRANCES WOOLLEY
Globe and Mail Blog
Posted on Wednesday, May 11, 2011 10:04AM EDTcomments
Email Tweet Print Decrease text size Increase text size
The authors study a large urban school district in the American south west - “LUSD-SW” - with a gifted program similar to that found in many Canadian school districts.

All students in LUSD-SW are evaluated in grade 5 using a combination of standardized tests, course grades, recommendations from teachers and information about the student’s family background. Those identified as gifted are eligible for advanced classes, placement in magnet schools, and may be assigned specially trained teachers.

Because of the No Child Left Behind act, students in LUSD-SW also take standardized tests every year. They take them grade 5, when they are assessed for eligibility for gifted programs. They take tests again in grade 6, when some of the students have had a year of gifted education, and some have had a year without the gifted designation. The testing is repeated again in grade 7.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/economy/economy-lab/frances-woolley/why-gifted-education-may-not-be-a-smart-idea/article2017949/


This gives Bui, Craig and Imberman an opportunity to evaluate the effectiveness of gifted education. Who does better on the grade 6 and 7 standardized tests, the students who just made it into the gifted program, or the ones who fell just below the gifted threshold?

[Anonymous]

But the goal of G&T isn't to teach to the test. They have (presumably) learned more about things that aren't on the tests.

[Anonymous]

I think you make a good point PP. One of the issues this article does not address is how wide the gap in achievement can be especially in urban districts. Often the G&T program is basically similar to the suburbs.