Gifted Programs at Charter Schools?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am the OP. I was never considering the possibility of having no advanced programming such as Advanced Placement, IB, etc, etc, I was specifically referring to a pull-out GT program.

PP here- ours was a pullout program that started with a few hours per week in first grade and in upper grades was relegated to specific subject matter in a large block of time (English and Social studies focused….it was actually a pretty cool comprehensive block curriculum that included art, history, literature etc. all working together) then we had separate math and science but all of the G&T kids basically ended up in the highest level of math and science together so it kind of felt like an extension of the program. They did a nice job with it. Sadly, the program no longer exists as the state’s former governor/current Vice President pulled funding for it....right before advocating for gay conversion therapy and refusing a needle exchange that could have prevented hundreds of cases of HIV....but I digress.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Language charters are a filter for gifted children - or at least advanced programming. That's one of the reasons everyone wants in.

No. DCPS does not do it as well.

Now how's that?

Also wonder how does montessori support gifted kids. Although I know what the generic answer would be (kids choose their own pathways and pace etc).

My own very advanced child is challenged in Montessori in a way that traditional schools couldn't offer without very small class sizes and individual attention. If a child is ready to move on to mastering the next skill they are able to, without having to wait for others to catch up. In practice this means that a 1st grader can do division and multiplication to many decimal places, or spend hours understanding and exploring fractions and decimal fractions without being told that they'll get to that in 2nd grade (or 4th or 5th). If they are interested in calculating the basic area of a square they can look around the school and find larger and more complex shapes to calculate area for, or learn how to calculate the area of a circle -- and they do this in uninterrupted three hour work periods. If they want to learn how an airplane works they will do the research independently or in a group and perhaps decide to go to the Air and Space museum to learn more, or interview a pilot -- then write a report. They will propose a field trip "going out" and plan it all themselves, from budget to travel plans, and including making phone calls. yes, at 6 or 7 years old. the mixed age format means that kids learn from those older than them but also that they are not on a rigid timetable to learn certain things at certain times, and that they are role models for younger kids.

PP which montessori are you at? We are likely to look into Montessori for DS for this reason.

Did this question ever get answered? I'm not 100% sold on Montessori, but this isn't the first anecdote I've heard like this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The two articles barely skim the surface of the issues. I don't like how the Slate piece derides "white and Asian" parents prepping kids for GT tests as "gaming the system." Where's the gaming in helping kids prepare for any tough test? If my hard-scrabble immigrant parents hadn't played this "game," sacrificing time and money they didn't really have to send me to quality test prep on weekends, I couldn't have attended a NYC magnet high school, the best thing that's ever happened to me. The complaints in the article are yet another example of how immigrants, particularly East Asian immigrants, are seen as not playing by the rules in this country - damn them, they work too hard for the good of society, and expect their kids to do the same.

Screening tests are intended to distinguish kids' ability levels and are based on an assumption that kids have not specifically prepared for the screening test. When kids are prepped specifically for the screening test, it skews the results.

This means that wealthy parents (who can afford tutoring companies that hire people familiar with the tests) get their kids into gifted programs over kids who are more deserving (i.e. kids who would have scored better than the little rich kids if all of them were unfamiliar with the test).

These screening tests are not designed to find the kids (parents really) who work the hardest. They are designed to find the smartest kids. Ideally, if they can identify under served smart kids (kids who don't have parents who are busting their asses to game the system) and offer those smart kids accelerated material, then society is much better off.

Get over yourself already. Intelligence must be cultivated in children, including geniuses, through hard work on the part of adults over many years. If cultivating intelligence constitutes gaming the system, bring it on, pour it no, just do it. And while you're at it, help especially bright poor kids find avenues to follow suit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:YY has very small class sizes (approx 17) which is why the JKLM families leave their IB. The scores are better and the facility is much better.

What percentage of IB families from JKLM attend YY?

Charter schools publish maps. Not a percentage but you can see there's a handful of WOTP families at YY. http://www.dcpcsb.org/washington-yu-ying-pcs-student-location-map

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:YY has very small class sizes (approx 17) which is why the JKLM families leave their IB. The scores are better and the facility is much better.

What percentage of IB families from JKLM attend YY?

BS that JKLM families leave their IB schools for YY for small class sizes. A few do it for the Mandarin, though the Chinese isn't very well taught. You just can't do immersion well without native speakers in the school, admins or students. No, YY's facility isn't better than the newly renovated JKLM facilities, especially Janney and Lafayette. YY boosters will claim anything. Why, because they need a longer WL? They're searching for elusive self respect?

Not sure exactly why, you'd have to ask them. Plenty IB from Janney, Lafayette, Hyde who we know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:YY has very small class sizes (approx 17) which is why the JKLM families leave their IB. The scores are better and the facility is much better.

What percentage of IB families from JKLM attend YY?

BS that JKLM families leave their IB schools for YY for small class sizes. A few do it for the Mandarin, though the Chinese isn't very well taught. You just can't do immersion well without native speakers in the school, admins or students. No, YY's facility isn't better than the newly renovated JKLM facilities, especially Janney and Lafayette. YY boosters will claim anything. Why, because they need a longer WL? They're searching for elusive self respect?

Not sure exactly why, you'd have to ask them. Plenty IB from Janney, Lafayette, Hyde who we know.

Not very many from WOTP at YY, at least percentage-wise. See this map of where YY students live. http://www.dcpcsb.org/washington-yu-ying-pcs-student-location-map

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In my experience, that is true. The kids without the money and resources need some kind of pull out program -- be it "gifted" or some particularly challenging school -- the most.

I am right now in a small village in Eastern Europe where elementary school is year round (3 tracks to accommodate all the students).
There are 5 old computers in the entire school. The teachers use basic textbooks and a green chalk board. There are no Promethean boards, no LCD projectors , no listening centers, very minimal technology.
I was invited to the 3rd grade class to help students with their English pronunciation. English is their 3rd language, being taught 3 times a week (45 minutes each)
All the kids were able to read from their English textbook and answer the questions in writing. They lacked oral fluency and so did their teacher.
I then stayed for the other subjects and visited other grade levels . Almost every student was able to follow the written directions. This is the only school the village has so there's no such thing as gifted and talented; however there is daily music and chess instruction for all students.
So I truly do not get it when people complain that students do not perform well in the capital of the USA because the school lacks funding.
Instead of spending so much time on constant testing, writing measurement topics making sure mastery is reached or else reteach the same thing again and again, let the teachers follow a certain curriculum.
However, this won't work in the USA because education is such a big business, with lucrative charters mushrooming right and left, because they have something "innovative" to offer.

How is the generational poverty in that village compared to DC? Are most of the fathers in jail, dead, or on their way there? Do they kids have role models and motivation to succeed via school?

what makes you think all the poorer kids in DC have no motivation or fathers? Do you realize a substantial proportion of ESL, at risk, and poorer kids get 4s and 5s on PARCC?

when you say "substantial" where are you getting tha tinformation. Its not true. When DC extrapolates data by race the chasm in scores grows into the grand canyon. Some do score well but its not substantail by a long shot

See above. Something like 1/5 of economically disadvantaged kids get 4s and 5s on PARCC. Something like 1/3 of African American girls do. Overall point is that there are many bright kids of all types in DC, doing well in school. Any gifted program would have to draw on this talent and be designed to reflect DC's demographics. Any advocate of a DC gifted program must take this fact to heart.

The PARCC assessment is not designed to show who is gifted, a 4 or 5 means the student is meeting or exceeding grade-level content and on path to college, not designed to determine if a students is G&T!

[Anonymous]

There are plenty of suburban-style-gifted kids in DCPS and they are not being hindered in their education. You don't need special testing or specially named programs to meet their needs. Honest. Some of you will never believe that though, and you are destined to live a life of dissatisfaction and angst.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ Also MacFarland.

McFarland is not going to have anything approaching advanced learning. Even with a second la gauge.

agreed. None of the feeders to it are producing strong enough cohorts and wont be for decades

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ Also MacFarland.

McFarland is not going to have anything approaching advanced learning. Even with a second la gauge.

The school is barely open. What's your basis for asserting that?

look at the PARCC scores for the feeders, coupled with high poverty and at risk numbers. Do the math. The feeders may have strong lower grades but none of 5th graders are strong cohorts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are plenty of suburban-style-gifted kids in DCPS and they are not being hindered in their education. You don't need special testing or specially named programs to meet their needs. Honest. Some of you will never believe that though, and you are destined to live a life of dissatisfaction and angst.

I'm a parent of one of those kids and I'm lucky that my kid's teachers are willing to pull out all the stops. But you do get to a point when you hit the limit of what teachers can do in the classroom.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are plenty of suburban-style-gifted kids in DCPS and they are not being hindered in their education. You don't need special testing or specially named programs to meet their needs. Honest. Some of you will never believe that though, and you are destined to live a life of dissatisfaction and angst.

I'm a parent of one of those kids and I'm lucky that my kid's teachers are willing to pull out all the stops. But you do get to a point when you hit the limit of what teachers can do in the classroom.

And that is true everywhere, even in the suburban magnets. No gifted child is going to be satisfied with school alone, no matter what the school offers, but that doesn't mean school is not enough. It means these kids are driven to more and need the opportunity to explore outside of school. If it weren't for the social benefits of school and a parent's need to work, homeschool would be ideal for truly gifted kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's not that simple. Our Latino cleaning lady's 10 year-old attends at GT program in MoCo. She tells me that he's attending a sleep-away GT math summer school the county is paying for.

From what I've seen when she brings him with her to work, his math homework is much harder than that my "snowflake" of the same age gets at a DC charter with a mile-long WL for every grade.

MoCo teacher here and DCPS parent (for the free pre-k). I currently teach enriched and accelerated math for students who are most likely to make it to the GT center. Enrichment and acceleration are two different things. Enrichment is a bit more challenging but still grade content level work. There's everything from critical thinking tasks, to critique a piece tasks, etc. Acceleration is above grade level content---many times a full year to two years above. I could not do enriched/acceleration and teach students who were severely behind. I teach in a "W" school and my class is diverse in terms of race and SES. When it's time for DD to go to Kinder, I'm pulling her from DCPS to MCPS as MCPS does a better job tracking, identifying and supporting GT students. MCPS also works with GT/LD students. Gifted students who might have a slight learning disability (ADHD, etc). It's sad that DCPS refuses to insert a GT program and what's worse it that they rebfuse to allow charters to be innovative or flexible to have a program.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not that simple. Our Latino cleaning lady's 10 year-old attends at GT program in MoCo. She tells me that he's attending a sleep-away GT math summer school the county is paying for.

From what I've seen when she brings him with her to work, his math homework is much harder than that my "snowflake" of the same age gets at a DC charter with a mile-long WL for every grade.

MoCo teacher here and DCPS parent (for the free pre-k). I currently teach enriched and accelerated math for students who are most likely to make it to the GT center. Enrichment and acceleration are two different things. Enrichment is a bit more challenging but still grade content level work. There's everything from critical thinking tasks, to critique a piece tasks, etc. Acceleration is above grade level content---many times a full year to two years above. I could not do enriched/acceleration and teach students who were severely behind. I teach in a "W" school and my class is diverse in terms of race and SES. When it's time for DD to go to Kinder, I'm pulling her from DCPS to MCPS as MCPS does a better job tracking, identifying and supporting GT students. MCPS also works with GT/LD students. Gifted students who might have a slight learning disability (ADHD, etc). It's sad that DCPS refuses to insert a GT program and what's worse it that they rebfuse to allow charters to be innovative or flexible to have a program.

DCPS has no role in what Charters choose to do or not, so I don't get your point?

[Anonymous]

OSSE has a role in DCPS and charters. The city council does to a certain extent as well as the chancellor. The point is DC is so focused on the achievement gap that it will never have a GT program.