Reply to Another reason why labeling students as being gifted is counterproductive

Forum Index » DC Public and Public Charter Schools

Reply to "Another reason why labeling students as being gifted is counterproductive"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I don't think that most schools are using IQ tests to decide who gets to take AP classes. In my district, AP is said to be for the top 25% of students, while GT serves around 10%.  They also use standardized test results (achievement tests) to help decide which class a student should take, not "ability" or gifted testing.

The argument against ability grouping is that it's hard to move up once a student is placed in a "low" track, and minority or poor students are over represented in the low tracks.[/quote]

They shouldn't be using IQ tests at all.  Performance -- whether through subject-based testing or GPA -- should be the sole measure used if the goal of a public education system is to simpl to educate.  In contrast, the "pro-gifted" people seem to be arguing that some students need something more out of public school than a track that meets their area of competency.  Perhaps one of them could explain why.[/quote]

Most aren't using IQ tests to identify kids as GT, they are using ability tests (Cogat, NNAT, OLSAT etc.) which are highly correlated with IQ. Achievement testing also correlates highly with IQ, though not quite as much. Schools do a good job providing "tracks"(essentially AP or Pre Ap vs. general ed, or remedial/special ed) in middle and high school. And in most cases there isn't a lot "extra" provided to GT students at that age. I have a GT student and am fine with that. AP classes and academic clubs are probably enough for that age, and if it isn't, early college entry is always an option.

I think elementary school is where more GT parents see that there kid's educational needs aren't always being met. There is a reluctance to track students at that age so the pace of the class can be slow, and differentiation seems to be more of a buzzword than an actual thing that happens in school.[/quote]

So, what you're saying is, we don't need "IQ" or "ability" tests in order to track students appropriately.  The goal is appropriate tracking, not "gifted" identification or labeling.  Thanks for agreeing with the theme of the thread.[/quote]

I think that pull out GT programs are nice with projects/creative thinking exercises are nice, but it is far more important to have appropriate instruction in math/language arts. They seem to really stress creativity in my kid's program, which is funny because the tests they use to identify kids are not testing creativity. Gifted kids are often very creative, but not all of them. My child was selected based on his math ability, but the program has nothing to do with math. That is where he needs to be challenged, but all of the kids do the same math work, regardless of ability.

One purpose of IQ/ability testing is to pick up kids who are smart but underachievers and try to help them reach their potential. These kids have a lot of potential, but are not doing as well for whatever reason. A lot of time these kids are ADHD, dyslexic, or come from a home environment that is not particularly engaged in academics. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics