NYC eliminating gifted and talented program

[Anonymous]

I would assume all of your parents who are railing against this decision will simply do your own research and teach your kids whatever they need to know. Aren’t you happy that they have less time to be indoctrinated by the state?

GT programs below high school are largely a joke. Just a balm for parents to think their “gifted” child’s oh so exceptional needs are being met.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is a relatively new phenomenon. actually.

I went to one of the said G&T NYC High Schools in the late 70's/early 80's. There was a sizeable population of black and brown students back then in addition to asian and white students...about 30 %.

Elementary in lower income areas needs to stop teaching to tghe lowest common denominator and parents need to support their children's education...not expect the teachers to carry the burden of raising their kids!.

Things were different back then...parents took a more active role in their childrens' education and none of the awful behaviors I see in the schools now was tolerated allowing the higher achievers in all demographics to actually learn!

You're right. And if anyone knew how to go back to that, we would. So far, no one has figured out how.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The qualities of gifted and talented are by definition are present at birth and are equally distributed across race and socio-economic factors.

If your program actually selects for environments factors that favour middle class and predominantly white kids then you don’t fit the title and deserve to be abolished.

When these programs select low income Black, Hispanic and any kid with EFL at the proportion that they are present in the community then I will take them seriously.

The problem with what you want is that the talent that may or may not be present in low income black and Hispanic kids will go to waste because no one at home is nurturing it. The schools can, at best, make a small dent. So the current system is best whereby the kids who are willing to do the extra work and will put the extra education to good use are admitted.

Except that isn’t the current system since only a few kids are ever even offered the extra education. When we tried Baltimore City public schools, I was told that there was nothing that could be done for my DC who was advanced. We had to move to MoCo where she was quickly identified as GT and given appropriate opportunities. We escaped Baltimore City public schools because we could afford to move. Most poor families can’t afford to move neighborhoods let alone to another school district to access opportunities for their gifted kids. They are left to wither on the vine.

I am wondering when this was that MCPS quickly id'd and provided GT education...

[Anonymous]

We moved to NYC after our kids were 4…. they won’t even test them. I assume because there’s no room as it is, so why bother. That said, everyone we know with a kid who made it into G&T have an only child (or a sibling far younger) + a tutor or a well-off finance bro dad + SAHM + a tutor. Because parents have to prep the kids.

That said our kids got WORKED when me moved - NYC elementary public school math (at least on the upper East side) is far ahead of Maryland. Our kids needed tutoring and had to go to school on Saturdays to catch up. Their teachers were wonderful, but it was rough. Who needs gifted when even the parents can’t do 3rd grade math?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The qualities of gifted and talented are by definition are present at birth and are equally distributed across race and socio-economic factors.

If your program actually selects for environments factors that favour middle class and predominantly white kids then you don’t fit the title and deserve to be abolished.

When these programs select low income Black, Hispanic and any kid with EFL at the proportion that they are present in the community then I will take them seriously.

This is absolutely not backed up by research.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The war on things Asians like escalates.

tell me about it- the tax system already mines asians while leaving wealthy whites untouched, now they want take away a route to a better education b/c "equity"

And yes a tax system that relies primarily on 150k to 1M W-2 salary earners to fund the government is racist towards asians b/c Asians make up a disproportionate percentage of that population.

I didn’t even realize this until you said it, but it’s so true. Though, there are plenty of white people in that $150k-1M bucket as well

Nothing to do with race, and everything to do with power.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think they should eliminate g&t - they should ensure it is demographically balanced.

I don’t think they should eliminate g&t - they should ensure it is demographically balanced. -Wokes

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The qualities of gifted and talented are by definition are present at birth and are equally distributed across race and socio-economic factors.

If your program actually selects for environments factors that favour middle class and predominantly white kids then you don’t fit the title and deserve to be abolished.

When these programs select low income Black, Hispanic and any kid with EFL at the proportion that they are present in the community then I will take them seriously.

I know you really want to believe this but it isn't true. REEEEEEEEE out all you want but the the data shows otherwise.

I said equal at birth not in early childhood when, yes there is disparity. The answer is greater post natal care for the parents to encourage them the sing the alphabet song, teach lullabies and nursery rhymes etc , the things that middle class parents do that creates that gap. Invest in the social safety net so these families have the means they need to provide a stable and nurturing environment.

An intervention as massive as adoption doesn't change adult IQ values much, so it's hard to see how penny ante encouragement for parents singing the alphabet song is going to do it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The qualities of gifted and talented are by definition are present at birth and are equally distributed across race and socio-economic factors.

If your program actually selects for environments factors that favour middle class and predominantly white kids then you don’t fit the title and deserve to be abolished.

When these programs select low income Black, Hispanic and any kid with EFL at the proportion that they are present in the community then I will take them seriously.

I know you really want to believe this but it isn't true. REEEEEEEEE out all you want but the the data shows otherwise.

I said equal at birth not in early childhood when, yes there is disparity. The answer is greater post natal care for the parents to encourage them the sing the alphabet song, teach lullabies and nursery rhymes etc , the things that middle class parents do that creates that gap. Invest in the social safety net so these families have the means they need to provide a stable and nurturing environment.

Except this is not true. IQ, like many other things, is highly heritable.

[Anonymous]

What are the educational prospects of a low IQ child from a middle class family then? Let’s ask that question.

In the movie Forest Gump, young forest was about to be assigned to a special school because of low IQ, his mother wanted him to get a normal education so banged the principle so he would change his mind. Of course that’s a movie, but there is some truth to how the privilege can get rules bent in their favour.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The qualities of gifted and talented are by definition are present at birth and are equally distributed across race and socio-economic factors.

If your program actually selects for environments factors that favour middle class and predominantly white kids then you don’t fit the title and deserve to be abolished.

When these programs select low income Black, Hispanic and any kid with EFL at the proportion that they are present in the community then I will take them seriously.

I know you really want to believe this but it isn't true. REEEEEEEEE out all you want but the the data shows otherwise.

I said equal at birth not in early childhood when, yes there is disparity. The answer is greater post natal care for the parents to encourage them the sing the alphabet song, teach lullabies and nursery rhymes etc , the things that middle class parents do that creates that gap. Invest in the social safety net so these families have the means they need to provide a stable and nurturing environment.

An intervention as massive as adoption doesn't change adult IQ values much, so it's hard to see how penny ante encouragement for parents singing the alphabet song is going to do it.

That’s not true, it’s the opposite. Adoption increase IQ compared to non adopted siblings.

https://www.webmd.com/children/news/20150323/adopted-kids-average-iq-higher-than-non-adopted-siblings-study

[Anonymous]

I think the issue is largely due to immigration patterns. I too went to an exam school in the Northeast in mid-80s and no way would make it today with families (largely immigrants who receive tutoring from their churches and a culture of valuing education) and elite parents sending their kids to public school for a private school experience (Blair Magnet) after years of cram school. Let’s face it G&T - and much of school - is a memory test in the arts and a working memory test in math. That software package is delivered at birth.

The only method at dodging these two crowds would be to give every child a neuropsych exam upon entry to school. Lol! A place like MCPS won’t even give that to a third grader who they’ve watched fail for three years.

But I am not kept up at night worrying about some naturally gifted kid in MCPS. I worry about the kid who is dyslexic and dyscalculic who just rolled in from a rural farm in Honduras.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The qualities of gifted and talented are by definition are present at birth and are equally distributed across race and socio-economic factors.

If your program actually selects for environments factors that favour middle class and predominantly white kids then you don’t fit the title and deserve to be abolished.

When these programs select low income Black, Hispanic and any kid with EFL at the proportion that they are present in the community then I will take them seriously.

This is absolutely not backed up by research.

The research flawlessly measures things that are highly influenced by environmental factors.

Take a Spanish speaking 4 year old and test them on English vocabulary that they may have had zero exposure to then of course they will score low. Even if you test a low income black kid for vocabulary, if their parents have limited vocabulary themselves then the kid won’t score well either.

Neither kids score truly represents their actual cognitive ability.

[Anonymous]

That should be flawed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The qualities of gifted and talented are by definition are present at birth and are equally distributed across race and socio-economic factors.

If your program actually selects for environments factors that favour middle class and predominantly white kids then you don’t fit the title and deserve to be abolished.

When these programs select low income Black, Hispanic and any kid with EFL at the proportion that they are present in the community then I will take them seriously.

This is a nice sentiment, but it's belied by the evidence. It's common wisdom in the social sciences that IQ or "g" (general intelligence) is highly correlated with maternal education level.

All four of my grandparents where only educated to 6 years old in Sri Lanka and now all 6 of their kids have post graduate degrees. So that’s bull. Give our least privileged citizens the resources and community driven high expectations that my parents got and the sky is the limit. It’s not expensive, they literally only needed textbooks pencils and paper. My dad still has his and used to tutor me from it.

That's an interesting anecdote, but it doesn't address the fact that numerous studies have found that intelligence is highly hereditable.

It's only hereditable when socioeconomic factors don't negatively impact your ability to learn.