Gifted programs, lack of, in DC

[Anonymous]

I think it's hilarious that so many of you think that DC devotes so many resources to the children who are the opposite of gifted. Special needs families get screwed too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think it's hilarious that so many of you think that DC devotes so many resources to the children who are the opposite of gifted. Special needs families get screwed too.

That inequity is not unique to DC, however.

-SN DC Charter school parent

[Anonymous]

[quote=Anonymous]I think it's hilarious that so many of you think that DC devotes so many resources to the children who are the opposite of gifted. Special needs families get screwed too.


Maybe people should stop expecting so much "free stuff". Schools are supposed to provide a "free and appropriate" education to all--that doesn't mean "all the bells and whistles we'd like." (Necessarily.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:[quote=Anonymous]I think it's hilarious that so many of you think that DC devotes so many resources to the children who are the opposite of gifted. Special needs families get screwed too.

Maybe people should stop expecting so much "free stuff". Schools are supposed to provide a "free and appropriate" education to all--that doesn't mean "all the bells and whistles we'd like." (Necessarily.)

The "free and appropriate education" (FAPE) is wording from the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and only applies to students with Individual Education Plans (IEPs).

[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 agree. Classifying kids as "gifted" or not at an early age is a mistake--there's a great chapter in Nurture Shock (I think) on that. A more flexible and fluid approach allows kids to move back and forth as needed, and allows a kid who is ready for more challenge in one subject but not in another to have that. It does take good staffing, but overall, it's a superior approach hat allows all kids to benefit from challenges when they are ready, without sticking a label on them one way or the other. Curious what ES you're at?

Murch

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think "gifted" must be a terribly damaging term to label a child based on recent research about what creates kids who will take on challenges and stick with hard problems rather than give up?

I would love it if DC had differentiation for kids who are willing to pay attention and work hard.

In fact it does. That is the whole point of in-class differentiation. (And the SEM enrichment model as well). Every child is given the opportunity to work to their "reach" level. For example, a science project will be rather open ended. There are the basics each project must include, but a child can choose their own topic, they find their own resources (with guidance if needed), they choose the difficulty of the final project to show mastery, etc. One kid may choose bear hibernation and use DK books, while another chooses the electroconductivity of bacteria and reads primary research papers (this is not far off from a real ES example). Or an essay is assigned to compare two texts -- the teacher guides the student to choose the texts based on reading level, and while one child may write a three paragraph essay, another may write 10 pages, and yet another may create a video presentation or movie. The teacher takes each child where they are and pushes them to the next level. Mixed with that are also uniform assignments that every child does, but again, each child is guided to work on their areas of difficulty and to push their limits in the areas they find easy.

No labels needed. At our ES and MS, I see this working very well, and the model is far superior to what we had in GaTE when we were growing up.

What is your ES and MS? Please name them.

+1. What are the names of these schools?

Also Murch and Deal.

[Anonymous]

The main reason so many high SES families bail from both DCPS and DC Charter schools around 3rd grade is that in-class differentiation, laudable as the concept is, only works well when, 1) very favorable teacher:instruction ratios are in the mix, 2) the in-class achievement gap isn't a chasm, and, 3) almost all the students consistently behave pretty well. Thus, you don't find fertile ground for in-class differentiation in most public schools in DC.

What happens is that the schools with the least need to improve their ratios (because PTAs raise money to pay for teachers aides past K), and with the narrowest in-class achievement gaps, are best able, and most willing, differentiate aggressively. The arrangement stinks city wide.

The achievement gap kicks in so very young in gentrifying neighborhoods. I thought about this while chaperoning a K class field trip to the US Botanical Gardens model trains exhibit. While my high SES charges ran around pointing at building replicas in the exhibit, shouting out names (White House! Supreme Court! Washington Monument! Lincoln Memorial!), my bright, eager low SES charges didn't seem to have a clue. They appeared to have no idea which building replicas we were looking at.

We're not talking about an achievement gap; we're contending with an achievement Grand Canyon.

[Anonymous]

First round PARCC tests have highlighted just how wide the gap is. After another round or two, most of the administration issues will have been sorted out and schools will lose their "we just got the computers and most of our kids can't type" cover. Then what? Facing facts?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:First round PARCC tests have highlighted just how wide the gap is. After another round or two, most of the administration issues will have been sorted out and schools will lose their "we just got the computers and most of our kids can't type" cover. Then what? Facing facts?

Unrelated to the gap, and unrelated to the topic of gifted education in DC, keyboarding skills will continue to be a challenge until kids have those skills. You can't teach most 8-year-olds to type well enough to type an essay or a sentence on a timed computer test in a few hours per year. Even the brightest little kids will still chicken peck a key board. Now, if they could text their answers just using thumbs, that would be whole other matter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First round PARCC tests have highlighted just how wide the gap is. After another round or two, most of the administration issues will have been sorted out and schools will lose their "we just got the computers and most of our kids can't type" cover. Then what? Facing facts?

Unrelated to the gap, and unrelated to the topic of gifted education in DC, keyboarding skills will continue to be a challenge until kids have those skills. You can't teach most 8-year-olds to type well enough to type an essay or a sentence on a timed computer test in a few hours per year. Even the brightest little kids will still chicken peck a key board. Now, if they could text their answers just using thumbs, that would be whole other matter.

Do you really believe that? Have you see how computer savvy kids are? Computers are available at school & library for those who don't have home access.

http://www.learninggamesforkids.com/keyboarding_games.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First round PARCC tests have highlighted just how wide the gap is. After another round or two, most of the administration issues will have been sorted out and schools will lose their "we just got the computers and most of our kids can't type" cover. Then what? Facing facts?

Unrelated to the gap, and unrelated to the topic of gifted education in DC, keyboarding skills will continue to be a challenge until kids have those skills. You can't teach most 8-year-olds to type well enough to type an essay or a sentence on a timed computer test in a few hours per year. Even the brightest little kids will still chicken peck a key board. Now, if they could text their answers just using thumbs, that would be whole other matter.

Do you really believe that? Have you see how computer savvy kids are? Computers are available at school & library for those who don't have home access.

http://www.learninggamesforkids.com/keyboarding_games.html

Game playing yes, typing no below 8th grade. I teach in a high school and you'd be surprised how poor some students typing is, I also have a high number of students who do not have access to a computer at home and have never set foot in a library.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First round PARCC tests have highlighted just how wide the gap is. After another round or two, most of the administration issues will have been sorted out and schools will lose their "we just got the computers and most of our kids can't type" cover. Then what? Facing facts?

Unrelated to the gap, and unrelated to the topic of gifted education in DC, keyboarding skills will continue to be a challenge until kids have those skills. You can't teach most 8-year-olds to type well enough to type an essay or a sentence on a timed computer test in a few hours per year. Even the brightest little kids will still chicken peck a key board. Now, if they could text their answers just using thumbs, that would be whole other matter.

Not sure I buy it. If keyboarding skills were a factor, DCIs scores should have been much higher? A school with a 1:1 technology approach and kids keyboard most everything. Shokldnt the disadvantage / advantage cut both ways.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The main reason so many high SES families bail from both DCPS and DC Charter schools around 3rd grade is that in-class differentiation, laudable as the concept is, only works well when, 1) very favorable teacher:instruction ratios are in the mix, 2) the in-class achievement gap isn't a chasm, and, 3) almost all the students consistently behave pretty well. Thus, you don't find fertile ground for in-class differentiation in most public schools in DC.

What happens is that the schools with the least need to improve their ratios (because PTAs raise money to pay for teachers aides past K), and with the narrowest in-class achievement gaps, are best able, and most willing, differentiate aggressively. The arrangement stinks city wide.

The achievement gap kicks in so very young in gentrifying neighborhoods. I thought about this while chaperoning a K class field trip to the US Botanical Gardens model trains exhibit. While my high SES charges ran around pointing at building replicas in the exhibit, shouting out names (White House! Supreme Court! Washington Monument! Lincoln Memorial!), my bright, eager low SES charges didn't seem to have a clue. They appeared to have no idea which building replicas we were looking at.

We're not talking about an achievement gap; we're contending with an achievement Grand Canyon.

Agree. In preschool we were all about "we will stay no matter what!" Now that my child is older and I see how much time is spent teaching really basic things in class, my child is bored. We will probably leave at middle school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First round PARCC tests have highlighted just how wide the gap is. After another round or two, most of the administration issues will have been sorted out and schools will lose their "we just got the computers and most of our kids can't type" cover. Then what? Facing facts?

Unrelated to the gap, and unrelated to the topic of gifted education in DC, keyboarding skills will continue to be a challenge until kids have those skills. You can't teach most 8-year-olds to type well enough to type an essay or a sentence on a timed computer test in a few hours per year. Even the brightest little kids will still chicken peck a key board. Now, if they could text their answers just using thumbs, that would be whole other matter.

Not sure I buy it. If keyboarding skills were a factor, DCIs scores should have been much higher? A school with a 1:1 technology approach and kids keyboard most everything. Shokldnt the disadvantage / advantage cut both ways.

No, that's missing the point. What the lack of computer skills does is cause more false negatives, but not all negatives are false -- we just can't really know how many are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First round PARCC tests have highlighted just how wide the gap is. After another round or two, most of the administration issues will have been sorted out and schools will lose their "we just got the computers and most of our kids can't type" cover. Then what? Facing facts?

Unrelated to the gap, and unrelated to the topic of gifted education in DC, keyboarding skills will continue to be a challenge until kids have those skills. You can't teach most 8-year-olds to type well enough to type an essay or a sentence on a timed computer test in a few hours per year. Even the brightest little kids will still chicken peck a key board. Now, if they could text their answers just using thumbs, that would be whole other matter.

Do you really believe that? Have you see how computer savvy kids are? Computers are available at school & library for those who don't have home access.

http://www.learninggamesforkids.com/keyboarding_games.html

Game playing yes, typing no below 8th grade. I teach in a high school and you'd be surprised how poor some students typing is, I also have a high number of students who do not have access to a computer at home and have never set foot in a library.

If you consider Minecraft a game (I do), that is how my 8 year old daughter learned how to type, thanks to mimicking her older brother who would exchange messages online with the other players in the virtual world. Enough to get a 4 on the ELA for the PARCC in 3rd grade last year.