NY cutting gifted programs due to lack of diversity

[Anonymous]

Technically the CAS is supposed to measure the knowledge a kid should have at that grade level, so it essentially means that they have mastered that grade level. None of the state tests really measure more than grade mastery, you have to progressive test to really understand if a kid is advanced and how advanced they really are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't think being top 5% according to DCCAS is likely a high bar, isn't it comparing only to other urban school systems?

DC-CAS just compares within DC schools. But who said anything about DC-CAS? Or did you just assume the PP was referring to DC-CAS when saying "top 5%" - because that's not necessarily what it means.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I could care less about the label. What's important is that the students get the support and level of academic challenge that's appropriate to their level of capability.

SEM, as implemented in DCPS, appears to just be in-class differentiation. Historically, differentiation at DCPS has been in name only, they teach to the middle and ignore everyone else. The majority of teachers cannot do differentiation well.

Even so, DCPS does not implement the full SEM model, they only do a few small pieces. There's no real opportunity in DCPS for acceleration. Maybe it's a start - but it's a very small one and they have very far to go if they want to attract or retain students.

DCPS does not implement the full SEM model, they only do a few small pieces? The link that someone gave a few postings back says "SEM is a non-traditional approach to gifted and talented education developed originally by Dr. Joseph Renzulli, director of the National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented. Each SEM school has one full-time, professionally-trained enrichment resource teacher who facilitates a wide range of academic course offerings that falls largely outside of the core curriculum. For more information on the SEM program, please see our SEM FAQ Page."

That's not "just in-class differentiation". How come you didn't get your information correct before making incorrect assumptions?

[Anonymous]

"Lack of diversity" is a thoroughly lame excuse for cutting a program.

Following that logic, maybe we should drop special needs programs, because they aren't diverse enough either?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"Lack of diversity" is a thoroughly lame excuse for cutting a program.

Following that logic, maybe we should drop special needs programs, because they aren't diverse enough either?

Good point!

[Anonymous]

No lack of diversity may not be the only reason, but if all it does is allow well off parents, in this case predominantly white kids to get extra advantages on your tax dollar, why should it be supported. I get why gifted programs are needed, I was in one in Denver and it made a world of difference for education. However, a program such as the one in New York only cements privilege it does not really meet the need for advanced educational opportunity for advanced kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No lack of diversity may not be the only reason, but if all it does is allow well off parents, in this case predominantly white kids to get extra advantages on your tax dollar, why should it be supported. I get why gifted programs are needed, I was in one in Denver and it made a world of difference for education. However, a program such as the one in New York only cements privilege it does not really meet the need for advanced educational opportunity for advanced kids.

What "privilege" and "extra advantage" would that be? I think that's a red herring. Nobody ever asks about G&T in job interviews, nor does it generally get you anything special toward college or anywhere else in life. It's really just about keeping students sufficiently challenged and engaged when they outpace the regular curriculum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Its amazing to me that in a city full of so many smart, talented and organized people that we continue to accept the status quo of failing the brightest kids in DCPS. Then again, maybe parents aren't accepting it and that explains why these same smart and talented parents are pulling their smart and talented kids out of DCPS in 4th grade to get into Latin or Basis.

DCPS fails all kids, not just the brightest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I could care less about the label. What's important is that the students get the support and level of academic challenge that's appropriate to their level of capability.

SEM, as implemented in DCPS, appears to just be in-class differentiation. Historically, differentiation at DCPS has been in name only, they teach to the middle and ignore everyone else. The majority of teachers cannot do differentiation well.

Even so, DCPS does not implement the full SEM model, they only do a few small pieces. There's no real opportunity in DCPS for acceleration. Maybe it's a start - but it's a very small one and they have very far to go if they want to attract or retain students.

DCPS does not implement the full SEM model, they only do a few small pieces? The link that someone gave a few postings back says "SEM is a non-traditional approach to gifted and talented education developed originally by Dr. Joseph Renzulli, director of the National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented. Each SEM school has one full-time, professionally-trained enrichment resource teacher who facilitates a wide range of academic course offerings that falls largely outside of the core curriculum. For more information on the SEM program, please see our SEM FAQ Page."

That's not "just in-class differentiation". How come you didn't get your information correct before making incorrect assumptions?

Maybe, it's because that's what DCPS says? The SEM FAQ page is vague and nonspecific. But, every other reference that DCPS has put out on the topic of SEM cites it in the context of differentiation, which at DCPS has been in-class.

http://dcps.dc.gov/DCPS/About+DCPS/Press+Releases+and+Announcements/Press+Releases/DCPS+Announces+Gifted+and+Talented+Programs+at+Two+Middle+Schools+in+the+2012-2013+School+Year

"enrichment-based differentiated teaching"

http://profiles.dcps.dc.gov/Hardy+Middle+School

"a focus on differentiation and the School Enrichment Model"

In scouring all of the best information made available by DCPS to the public, what other conclusion is a parent going to come to, other than that it's differentiation?

Also, in looking at the SEM website and seeing the checklists they show for individual school districts (they don't even list DCPS) - they show that a limited, piecemeal implementation is typical for SEM, so I think it would be extraordinary for anyone to conclude they are implementing the full program. The Renzulli site also cites differentiation, as do DCPS confratute materials. Historically, any differentiation that DCPS has ever done has been in-class differentiation.

But since you seem insistent on saying that's incorrect, by all means please post some materials that show otherwise. A parent shouldn't have to rely on calling around and searching for a story that is different than what DCPS publishes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Technically the CAS is supposed to measure the knowledge a kid should have at that grade level, so it essentially means that they have mastered that grade level. None of the state tests really measure more than grade mastery, you have to progressive test to really understand if a kid is advanced and how advanced they really are.

^^^ This is why the Latin and Basis models exist. GT programs target kids that are above-average students and make the schools look stronger than they are. Tests like this, along with classroom performance, are used to determine who is GT and who is not. It captures most of the "high norm" group over time, but misses the needs of anyone above or below that group. For them, though, the enrichment concept does work.

Speaking with GT teachers, though, it becomes clear that the "special needs" category of GT (those kids that are profoundly gifted) is neither targeted nor helped through enrichment. Teachers are forced to teach to a specific curriculum, and cannot differentiate when a child is already beyond the curriculum. They can only add depth. So, if a first-grade class is learning to skip count, a GT kid may be encouraged to express counting in another fashion, maybe skip-counting in difficult intervals, or something along those lines. Though the child may be ready to discuss sets or permutations/combinations (still on topic!), those types of enrichment are completely unavailable.

The only option for acceleration is to take a child out of one grade and place them into another, less socially appropriate one (granted, for some kids, this is viable, particularly in the later grades). GT teachers (like ours) have to "wink, wink" the suggestion that public school is not the best place for gifted kids, despite the fact that the teachers really do care and want to do the best job they are allowed to.

So, schools like Latin and Basis come into play -- they don't have to follow the rules. They are allowed to truly differentiate, despite the repeated outcries to the effect of "they have to teach to every child." Until DCPS can create a test-in school with an alternate set of rules, no GT program is going to measure up.

Hopefully, Basis or Great Hearts will open a K-4 program in DC, and our kids will be better off. Until then, K-4 kids in the PG category are probably best off homeschooling or getting a private education. PG kids without resources will have to wait until differentiation is possible, if they don't become casualties of the system by then. It's an unfortunate side effect of the rules of the game we have laid out for ourselves.

Get rid of "No Child Left Behind" and "Common Core," and build something more constructive / targeted, and you'll find fewer children being left behind. I don't have an answer to this problem -- I'm just suggesting that we're looking at the wrong problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm gagging into my pearls when I think about the fact that my DC in DCPS can't be separated into a special tract and given the label she deserves--TRULY GIFTED. Instead, she has to be with all of your garden variety brats and despite the fact that our school has put into place quite a few programs to meet the needs of your GARDEN VARIETY mini-gifted kids, she nonetheless needs something MORE. A class just of her own, perhaps with a few others. I'm not ashamed to tell you that she scored at the 99th percentile on every IQ test ever created by man. My husband and I are going to go on a hunger strike until we get the exclusivity that we crave...er....that my dc deserves.

^ clueless troll.

c'mon -- obviously tongue in cheek. Not PP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Technically the CAS is supposed to measure the knowledge a kid should have at that grade level, so it essentially means that they have mastered that grade level. None of the state tests really measure more than grade mastery, you have to progressive test to really understand if a kid is advanced and how advanced they really are.

^^^ This is why the Latin and Basis models exist. GT programs target kids that are above-average students and make the schools look stronger than they are. Tests like this, along with classroom performance, are used to determine who is GT and who is not. It captures most of the "high norm" group over time, but misses the needs of anyone above or below that group. For them, though, the enrichment concept does work.

Speaking with GT teachers, though, it becomes clear that the "special needs" category of GT (those kids that are profoundly gifted) is neither targeted nor helped through enrichment. Teachers are forced to teach to a specific curriculum, and cannot differentiate when a child is already beyond the curriculum. They can only add depth. So, if a first-grade class is learning to skip count, a GT kid may be encouraged to express counting in another fashion, maybe skip-counting in difficult intervals, or something along those lines. Though the child may be ready to discuss sets or permutations/combinations (still on topic!), those types of enrichment are completely unavailable.

The only option for acceleration is to take a child out of one grade and place them into another, less socially appropriate one (granted, for some kids, this is viable, particularly in the later grades). GT teachers (like ours) have to "wink, wink" the suggestion that public school is not the best place for gifted kids, despite the fact that the teachers really do care and want to do the best job they are allowed to.

So, schools like Latin and Basis come into play -- they don't have to follow the rules. They are allowed to truly differentiate, despite the repeated outcries to the effect of "they have to teach to every child." Until DCPS can create a test-in school with an alternate set of rules, no GT program is going to measure up.

Hopefully, Basis or Great Hearts will open a K-4 program in DC, and our kids will be better off. Until then, K-4 kids in the PG category are probably best off homeschooling or getting a private education. PG kids without resources will have to wait until differentiation is possible, if they don't become casualties of the system by then. It's an unfortunate side effect of the rules of the game we have laid out for ourselves.

Get rid of "No Child Left Behind" and "Common Core," and build something more constructive / targeted, and you'll find fewer children being left behind. I don't have an answer to this problem -- I'm just suggesting that we're looking at the wrong problem.

There aren't many profoundly gifted kids. Certainly not enough in DC to open a school just for them. I have nephews in a larger urban city that attend a gifted school, WIPPSI/WISC scores have to be 130+ (Just gifted) and they have trouble filling grades. Why should DC put forth resources to educate a handful of kids when they cannot get the majority of kids at grade level?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The fact that Latin and Basis draw people shows that a challenging middle school, not necessarily gifted but aimed somewhere way above the lowest common denominator. If Latin can't take anyone other than who the lottery serves them, it shows that a challenging school is a good idea and that it could work without test-in and such divisive things.

Take a space and put a program in like this. I kind of think this is what Chancellor Henderson meant when she made her remarks about middle schools. A charter knockoff. Like take the Meyer space now that Cardozo's out of there and set up DCPS Challenge Middle School and put in a clone of a top suburban middle school program, lottery entry only.

Some of this model is by design. Yes the schools have to take all comers, but they make clear the academic demands and expectations. This has a dual purpose of attracting students who can handle the challenge and dissuading those who cannot.

I'd have no problem with DCPS offering a similar model. This isn't a zero sum game. Not every student needs to be an advanced learner, but there needs to be a place for those who are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fact that Latin and Basis draw people shows that a challenging middle school, not necessarily gifted but aimed somewhere way above the lowest common denominator. If Latin can't take anyone other than who the lottery serves them, it shows that a challenging school is a good idea and that it could work without test-in and such divisive things.

Take a space and put a program in like this. I kind of think this is what Chancellor Henderson meant when she made her remarks about middle schools. A charter knockoff. Like take the Meyer space now that Cardozo's out of there and set up DCPS Challenge Middle School and put in a clone of a top suburban middle school program, lottery entry only.

Some of this model is by design. Yes the schools have to take all comers, but they make clear the academic demands and expectations. This has a dual purpose of attracting students who can handle the challenge and dissuading those who cannot.

I'd have no problem with DCPS offering a similar model. This isn't a zero sum game. Not every student needs to be an advanced learner, but there needs to be a place for those who are.

Exactly. Call it DC We Will Officially No Joke Make this Hard for You Middle School. Teach as if there is no need for remediation, and do remediation via tutoring and assistance programs, not during class or dragging the program out. Make it clear that if you get a C- average for a semester, you have to leave/go back to your inbound school, no matter if mommy cries. I would try hard to keep everyone there on track of course, but at the end of each semester it is a no excuses program. And guarantee that certain programming will be offered there even if dollars do not follow students, so, that (counterintuitively) the students will actually follow the programming and bring the dollars with them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fact that Latin and Basis draw people shows that a challenging middle school, not necessarily gifted but aimed somewhere way above the lowest common denominator. If Latin can't take anyone other than who the lottery serves them, it shows that a challenging school is a good idea and that it could work without test-in and such divisive things.

Take a space and put a program in like this. I kind of think this is what Chancellor Henderson meant when she made her remarks about middle schools. A charter knockoff. Like take the Meyer space now that Cardozo's out of there and set up DCPS Challenge Middle School and put in a clone of a top suburban middle school program, lottery entry only.

Some of this model is by design. Yes the schools have to take all comers, but they make clear the academic demands and expectations. This has a dual purpose of attracting students who can handle the challenge and dissuading those who cannot.

I'd have no problem with DCPS offering a similar model. This isn't a zero sum game. Not every student needs to be an advanced learner, but there needs to be a place for those who are.

Exactly. Call it DC We Will Officially No Joke Make this Hard for You Middle School. Teach as if there is no need for remediation, and do remediation via tutoring and assistance programs, not during class or dragging the program out. Make it clear that if you get a C- average for a semester, you have to leave/go back to your inbound school, no matter if mommy cries. I would try hard to keep everyone there on track of course, but at the end of each semester it is a no excuses program. And guarantee that certain programming will be offered there even if dollars do not follow students, so, that (counterintuitively) the students will actually follow the programming and bring the dollars with them.

It sounds like exactly like BASIS. Why do we need another one?