s/o Gifted classes in DC schools

[Anonymous]

I don't understand the deep skepticism about differentiation.

I went to a Montessori school through 4th grade. They didn't talk about differentiation back then -- but in order to meet the needs of a couple dozen kids ages 6-9 within a single classroom, you HAVE to be successfully providing differentiation, whatever you want to call it.

So I take it as given that, yes, differentiation can work, and work well. If DCPS -isn't- doing it well, that doesn't inevitably mean DC needs G&T programs -- maybe that means we need to get better at differentiation.

And it's a lot easier to get better at differentiation if you teachers and administration can focus on that, instead of spending all their time explaining for the 8 millionth time that no, they don't have a G&T program.

[Anonymous]

sorry, that last sentence should say, "if YOUR teachers and ..."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The cognitive dissonance involved in having test-in high schools in DCPS but no test-in options at lower grades is amazing. So, it's magically okay at 9th grade to offer programs of particular interest to the highest-achieving students but dangerous and wrong-headed at 8th? Or 6th? Or 2nd? One could argue that it's actually much more inclusive to do so at the younger elementary grades when the effects of the achievement gap are less pronounced and gifted kids of all background could be ID's and supported early on. Wake up, DCPS. If you want to continue hemorrhaging those kids to Charters, then great, by all means, proceed. Want to capture those families and keep them in neighborhood schools? Start serving them in a rich, meaningful way.

There has to be way to identify gifted kids who are less privileged, besides relying on straight scores.

Sorry, but my 40 plus year old husband was one of a group of gifted less privileged mostly minority kids who were identified relying on "straight scores" in 2nd grade. That first step changed his life forever and got him out of the South Bronx and to an Ivy League school... so... better to use straight scores early than not use anything... In 2nd grade they don't ask you what a regatta is, like the classist SATs, and the WISC etc the tests private schools use to choose preschool kids ought to be good enough for us. At least they would be doing something...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

What is the application process for SWW and Bannekar like if they don't use a test?

SWW uses a test, albeit not a very difficult one, and an interview (highly subjective of course). The racial balance is close to that of the city, year after year. Draw your own conclusions.

Banneker's application is much like a college application, involving a personal statement, academic transcripts and a couple of recommendations. Something is obviously amiss with that enrollment approach, given that Banneker's average SAT scores are a tad below the national average on all three sections (yet the school freely advertises its average SAT scores, proudly).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not sure I see your point.

Why worry about backlash over G&T when CURRENTLY no kids in DCPS are being given adequate educational choices regardless of whether or not they are G&T?

At least a G&T program would start to address the needs - and would allow DCPS to be able to start focusing on the other kids whose educational needs aren't being met either.

The way to eat an elephant is one bite at a time. But instead all we have is endless paralysis and hand-wringing, and as a result nothing gets done.

First, there are kids in DCPS that are being given adequate educational choices. Unfortunately, it is not widespread and they are now virtually impossible to get into by OOB lottery.

You are solving a problem that you see as a way to keep your children in the system (assuming of course your children qualify) and it will likely be viewed politically as giving more to the haves while not addressing the needs of the kids that DC is failing miserably that do not have choices (by choices I mean parents that can and will vote with their feet and ensure their kids are educated). From the way you write, it is clear that you are educated and likely were not raised in DCPS so you chose to move here and you probably had opportunities to think about your child's educational outcomes along the way and decided you could make a go of it in some manner. The children most under served by DC do not have a choice. It would be nice/good/ideal for your children to be well served by DCPS. That said, your children will be fine because you will make choices to ensure this. I will do the same if it stops working for us. We might not like the choices, but there are plenty of good public and private schools in the area, we just may have to move or make financial choices we wish we did not have to make.

I support a GT program (and I think my children would qualify). But, I do not think it will happen because of the political landscape until you make more schools effective for the kids in the most need.

But we should extrapolate on that last sentence. Aren't the kids in need truly the smart ones in underserved communities? They are the ones who have the most to lose in this lowered standards environment and the most to gain from a gifted program. I get why people are averse to the idea...ie: the good students would leave and lower the bar even more for the rest of the public school population. But a mediocre education does nothing for the intellectually gifted child and therefore nothing for the greater good of society.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand the deep skepticism about differentiation.

I went to a Montessori school through 4th grade. They didn't talk about differentiation back then -- but in order to meet the needs of a couple dozen kids ages 6-9 within a single classroom, you HAVE to be successfully providing differentiation, whatever you want to call it.

So I take it as given that, yes, differentiation can work, and work well. If DCPS -isn't- doing it well, that doesn't inevitably mean DC needs G&T programs -- maybe that means we need to get better at differentiation.

And it's a lot easier to get better at differentiation if you teachers and administration can focus on that, instead of spending all their time explaining for the 8 millionth time that no, they don't have a G&T program.

If you spend any time at all in a reasonably good DCPS, even more so in one that isn't homogeneously good or homogeneously struggling, then you'll know that there is a lot of differentiation going on. Just because a few uninformed DCUM posters claim there isn't doesn't mean that there isn't. DCPS just doesn't publicize it and probably hasn't even ever made a conscious effort about it. It's something that was way back eliminated with some fanfare and has since most definitely been quietly reintroduced. How quiet it is around "differentiation" is also to be explained by the fact that neither egalitarians nor elitists like it much. Therefore, you'll more often see it discussed as "ability grouping" (as distinct from "tracking"). Other popular concepts are "pull-outs" or "looping". If you want to be heard, on your school's LSAT for example, try those less charged terms instead.

[Anonymous]

Okay, no. Not true. Watkins has made enormous changes in the past year, implementing ability grouping and real differentiation at all levels. Last year, very little. This year, tons. This was clearly a priority of the new(ish) principal and had not been going on in the past. Same story at lots of other schools -- happens when leadership wills it to, not because this is something that organically occurs under normal operating conditions in DCPS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Okay, no. Not true. Watkins has made enormous changes in the past year, implementing ability grouping and real differentiation at all levels. Last year, very little. This year, tons. This was clearly a priority of the new(ish) principal and had not been going on in the past. Same story at lots of other schools -- happens when leadership wills it to, not because this is something that organically occurs under normal operating conditions in DCPS.

I think the Cluster (Watkins/Stuart-Hobson) is more the exception to the rule than you think, possibly because it resisted differentiation for ideological (egalitarian) reasons given its 'founding principles' (back in the 1980s I believe). Amidst surrounding schools gently and quietly turning a corner on matters of differentiation, it took a leadership change there. I'm glad though it's happening, as I have children headed for Stuart-Hobson.

[Anonymous]

Ideological reasons are well intentioned but an utter disaster in practice. When for example you have a middle school classroom where some of the kids are already capable of reading at a college level, and others can't read at all, there's so much disparity that no teacher can meet any of their needs effectively. Even with superstar teachers, there will always be students missing out, the classroom will be always dysfunctional and uncohesive as a whole.

[Anonymous]

Many dcps schools have embraced guided reading and ability grouping so that a struggling reader could work on hop on pop while a stronger reader would read Charlotte's web.

If you have that of differentiation going on in a class does a student need to leave class as well?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ideological reasons are well intentioned but an utter disaster in practice. When for example you have a middle school classroom where some of the kids are already capable of reading at a college level, and others can't read at all, there's so much disparity that no teacher can meet any of their needs effectively. Even with superstar teachers, there will always be students missing out, the classroom will be always dysfunctional and uncohesive as a whole.

This is really getting to the issue, differentiation works well within a certain spectrum; however, when you have children that cannot read (for whatever reason) then it clearly will not work because those children cannot access the materials. The problem is DCPS does not admit that students currently in high and middle school do not have these basic skills, these children need targeted intervention and by that I do not mean try a new thing every week with unqualified (literacy) teachers doing pull-out. DCPS should be able to point to a plan that they have across the school district for students that read/or are not able to read at specific lexile levels. Differentiation is a fantastic tool but you can't teach phonics and decoding at the same time as doing a differentiated close reading activity with a classroom of students from non to on grade level students, while simultaneously creating your own curriculum. That's a whole other problem, lack of curricula at DCPS!!!! Get busy DCPS you have enough people at central office to have created more than your current scope/sequence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ideological reasons are well intentioned but an utter disaster in practice. When for example you have a middle school classroom where some of the kids are already capable of reading at a college level, and others can't read at all, there's so much disparity that no teacher can meet any of their needs effectively. Even with superstar teachers, there will always be students missing out, the classroom will be always dysfunctional and uncohesive as a whole.

Hmmm. I don't agree that it is an utter disaster in practice. The problem is, that it is not applied consistently across DCPS. What you are describing above does not happen at every DCPS school. At our school kids who are not on grade level receive a great deal of support and a lot is done throughout the year to assess if kids are truly missing out and teachers adjust accordingly. Differentiation can work and it is working in some schools.

[Anonymous]

When there's extra support OUTSIDE of the regular classroom, it can work. But when there isn't, it results in disruption WITHIN the classroom because deep disparities consume and dilute all of the teacher's time and effectiveness, then it fails. The latter seems to be happening far more than the former.

[Anonymous]

Isn't it difficult, if not impossible, to enter VA or MD's G&T schools after the third grade? So, for all those parents talking about moving for middle school, has not that shipped past if your child does not test into one of those schools in second grade?

[Anonymous]

I find it hard to believe that any G&T program would turn away kids testing at the upper end of the IQ scale who've recently moved to the area.