Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:"Where well-heeled PTAs pony up for teachers aides, or pay for enough stuff so that schools can afford them past K (e.g. at Janney, Murch and Brent) gifted elementary school kids are increasingly pulled out for enrichment systematically."
Not true at Janney. The advanced kids are offered the option of doing more challenging homework, and have the opportunity on certain assignments/projects to do more work, but there aren't pull outs for the advanced kids.
And differentiation is far different from gifted education, and it doesn't ensure that all kids' needs are being met.
Agreed. I have 3 kids at Janney and there are not routine pull outs for advanced kids. Kids have been given more difficult spelling words or math work to do but that's about it. However, this serves the population just fine because 75% of the kids at the school
are those that would have been identified as "gifted and talented" in a large suburban school district like Fairfax which identifies something like 20% of the kids as "gifted".
At Janney every parent I know was an overachiever themselves and were in some sort of gifted and talented program. Their offspring are very bright and have had every advantage from birth on. Of the dozen so Janney kids i know who took the WIPSI at age 4/5 (with thoughts of maybe going to private school),
all were within the 95-99.9% range. We laugh on my block because all 6 Janney kids were tested in the 99% (we laugh because certainly these tests are highly susceptible).
Anyway, that all said, I don't know a single Janney kid who I'd truly consider "gifted" or a prodigy. You know the "doing advanced Algebra in second grade" type. These kids (who would really need a gifted program) are exceedingly rare---probably less than 10 per grade level in DC or even less than that.
It would seem a bit extreme to start an entire school to serve less than 100 kids city wide. For better or worse, what you have at Janney or other NWDC public elementary schools ARE "gifted programs" if gifted means what it has come to mean in most districts-----"very bright kids working a few grade levels ahead but not extreme academic prodigies".
If 75% of the kids would be identified as "gifted and talented" they are not truly G&T.![]()
What's "truly G&T"? Are MoCo and Fairfax identifying "truly G&T"? Or just bright/working well above grade level? Because what PP is saying is that in a school like Janney, most of the kids are working above grade level, and many score in the 95th+ percentile when tested. That doesn't make them "gifted."
Anonymous wrote:And in Montgomery county the gifted are 37%!
http://www.bethesdamagazine.com/Bethesda-Magazine/September-October-2012/The-Gifted-Left-Behind/?cparticle=2&siarticle=1
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Not remotely "understandable;" no, utterly myopic. If DC wants to dramatically improve its fraught public school system, it needs to woo and retain high SES parents in droves by dangling carrots before them. Better support for advanced learners across the board is a sop they'd go for.
And who is going to lead the charge for a (majority white) test-in school when DCPS can't get the majority of kids at grade level and commit political suicide?
Woo high SES parents?They already send their kids to private schools.
Yep. Gentrification can't come soon enough. Let's see what the city looks like in 10 years
Anonymous wrote:And in Montgomery county the gifted are 37%!
http://www.bethesdamagazine.com/Bethesda-Magazine/September-October-2012/The-Gifted-Left-Behind/?cparticle=2&siarticle=1
Anonymous wrote:Is it really 20% of kids in AAP in fairfax county? Where are you getting this 20% of kids number 11:20?
Also, why on earth do you assume everyone in AU Park with a graduate degree is smarter than everyone in the suburbs to get this idea that all of AU Park would be in the top 20% of say MoCo or Fairfax? They have plenty of million+ homes there as well you know. Seems off base.
Anonymous wrote:Is it really 20% of kids in AAP in fairfax county? Where are you getting this 20% of kids number 11:20?
Also, why on earth do you assume everyone in AU Park with a graduate degree is smarter than everyone in the suburbs to get this idea that all of AU Park would be in the top 20% of say MoCo or Fairfax? They have plenty of million+ homes there as well you know. Seems off base.
Anonymous wrote:So does Janney offer supports for the 25% that are not reading two grade levels ahead?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It is frustrating that pull outs in DC seem to focus on kids who are behind rather than those that are ahead.
Not the experience at our elementary school (Hearst). While those who are behind are getting pullouts, many of the kids who are ahead are getting pullouts as well to give them more challenging work. In fact, some have been concerned that the advanced kids are being pulled out too much.
But is that 3 kids in a whole class of 20+ or how many advanced kids getting pulled out?
And may I ask why anyone would be worried the advanced kids were being pulled out too much? (honest question!) For how many hours a week are they being pulled out? Is it the parents of the advanced kids that are worried or other parents?
Thanks!
NP here, but in-class differentiation thrives at our upper NW ES, too. In ELA and math there's a combination of full-class instruction and ability-based small group work. Usually 4-5 groups per class (of 20 or so), rotating through stations (including work with the teacher or an aide). One of my kids is advanced in math and the other in ELA, and both have been appropriately challenged throughout their ES years.
I grew up in a traditional tracked gifted program, and I think the in-class differentiation approach is superior. It keeps kids in heterogeneous classes and allows for fluid regrouping, which I think is huge--it allows teachers to respond to what they're seeing over time and doesn't consign kids to rigid tracks. My math kid has moved from the highest small group to independent work (when he was working ahead of the group on a particular unit) and back to the small group again. The teacher has the flexibility to make these changes in real-time.
The huge caveat is that the success of the in-class approach is completely dependent on a strong principal and teaching staff--the principal has to believe in it and create consistency in how teachers are applying the model. I recognize that this is not happening at most DCPS schools and that many kids are not being challenged appropriately. But I'd much rather see DCPS focus on implementing effective in-class differentiation at all schools than spend resources creating a gifted track that simply sucks out the "smart"/well-prepped kids.
I think the key thing here is you are in an upper NW school where the difference in the classroom are less stark then in an EoTP school where gentrification is happening. You truly have kids 1-2 grades levels in the same class with kids who are reading 2 grade levels behind. It takes a lot more than small group differentiaton to deal with that. Its shocking how many 9th graders in DC read at an elementary school level. Because they have been passed from grade to grade without any real focused or tracked help for them when they needed it most-in early elementary school. If my kid was at Janney I wouldnt worry about tracking. We are EoTP though and the differences in ability are shocking and sad. They become painfully evident by 2nd grade. This is also when more behvairoral problems creep into the classrrom. thus, the high SES flight from the school if that is an option. In DC, its not even so much about being gifted. The sad fact is that if your kid is proficient at GRADE LEVEL they are already ahead of 70% of their peers. I don't know if the solution is pulling out the gifted kids or the struggling kids, but its just unrealistic to think these two groups with such a significant learning gap can learn effectively in one class together.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:"Where well-heeled PTAs pony up for teachers aides, or pay for enough stuff so that schools can afford them past K (e.g. at Janney, Murch and Brent) gifted elementary school kids are increasingly pulled out for enrichment systematically."
Not true at Janney. The advanced kids are offered the option of doing more challenging homework, and have the opportunity on certain assignments/projects to do more work, but there aren't pull outs for the advanced kids.
And differentiation is far different from gifted education, and it doesn't ensure that all kids' needs are being met.
Agreed. I have 3 kids at Janney and there are not routine pull outs for advanced kids. Kids have been given more difficult spelling words or math work to do but that's about it. However, this serves the population just fine because 75% of the kids at the school
are those that would have been identified as "gifted and talented" in a large suburban school district like Fairfax which identifies something like 20% of the kids as "gifted".
At Janney every parent I know was an overachiever themselves and were in some sort of gifted and talented program. Their offspring are very bright and have had every advantage from birth on. Of the dozen so Janney kids i know who took the WIPSI at age 4/5 (with thoughts of maybe going to private school),
all were within the 95-99.9% range. We laugh on my block because all 6 Janney kids were tested in the 99% (we laugh because certainly these tests are highly susceptible).
Anyway, that all said, I don't know a single Janney kid who I'd truly consider "gifted" or a prodigy. You know the "doing advanced Algebra in second grade" type. These kids (who would really need a gifted program) are exceedingly rare---probably less than 10 per grade level in DC or even less than that.
It would seem a bit extreme to start an entire school to serve less than 100 kids city wide. For better or worse, what you have at Janney or other NWDC public elementary schools ARE "gifted programs" if gifted means what it has come to mean in most districts-----"very bright kids working a few grade levels ahead but not extreme academic prodigies".
If 75% of the kids would be identified as "gifted and talented" they are not truly G&T.![]()
My point exactly (Janney poster here).
Janney and 98% of gifted and talented programs in the US are simply filled with "very bright/capable of working several grade levels ahead kids".
Truly "gifted and talented" is a very rare bird and there are likely less than 10 kids per grade in DC. More likely less than 5.