Anonymous wrote:This is one of the worst IMO: "the gifted learner knows without working hard".

It should perhaps be "The gifted learner knows grade-level material without working hard." Ideally the gifted learner will be challenged enough, for example through a gifted program, that he or she will need to expend some real effort.

Frankly, I thought the article was terrible and full of stereotypes. She describes exactly one profile of one type of gifted learner. Heaven forbid a child should struggle with English as a second language, not be confident or outgoing, or be motivated by grades, etc.

This is one of the worst IMO: "the gifted learner knows without working hard"

This is exactly the kind of thought trap that many gifted kids fall into. Kids who think this way often limit themselves. When they hit a ceiling, then they are often afraid to work hard because they think it means they aren't "really" smart. This is the kind of stuff Carol Dweck talks about in Mindset. NO ONE knows everything. Teaching kids that they "aren't really gifted" if they don't know without working hard is an incredibly mistake.

And the scenario described in that article (the teacher referred a kid who was ultimately not identified) is exactly why I think it's great that FCPS tests EVERY child. Not that I think the testing process is 100% accurate or without flaws, but it prevents a lot of these scenarios.

Good article, but I wish the author had chosen a bright boy and a gifted girl (and my AAP student is a boy).

Part of my disappointment is that I think there is truth in the stereotype. At our center (which I will not name), the majority of the girls are bright, adaptable, and quick to follow directions. The boys are more likely to ask the deeper questions and eschew homework, etc., for something they find more interesting.

It makes me think there are more environmental factors at work here than we currently believe.

Anonymous wrote:Wow! Didn't know Stephen Kohl-bear was in AAP! Or was it called "G/T" when he attended???

Wow! Didn't know Stephen Kohl-bear was in AAP! Or was it called "G/T" when he attended???

Anonymous wrote:Well, it seems FCPS finally recognized that distinction after changing the name and curriculum of the program formerly known as GT...

Well, it seems FCPS finally recognized that distinction after changing the name and curriculum of the program formerly known as GT...

The vast majority of AAP kids are bright, not gifted... my child included. DC is already accepted into the program, so why should I be concerned about a distinction b/t bright and gifted? The committee seems to think my bright child (and many others) are qualified for AAP.

If you think it is only for the gifted, you should talk to FCPS-AAP administrators and Dr. Garza.

This article should be included in the AAP information packet! Before you even bother with a parent referral, read this very brief but very informative article that very clearly explains the difference between a bright student and a gifted learner. Parents, be honest -- is your child truly "gifted" (e.g. computing derivatives when he was in his diapers) or is he/she a very bright, driven and high achieving student? Yes, there's a difference....

http://m.psychologytoday.com/blog/gifted-ed-guru/201201/the-bright-child-vs-the-gifted-learner-whats-the-difference