BTW DCUM public schools do prepare students well for college.

As usual people are confusing gifted (hate that word) with prodigy. Gifted, now called more appropriately (AAP academic!) is generally IQ 115-130. These kids find the regular schoolwork easy and are often the children of UMC professionals. There are a lot of these kids in DCUM.

Prodigy, IQ 140-200 are exceptional and much rarer. They have different needs but not usually well addressed in a public school because they are very rare.

Anonymous wrote:“I had a teacher friend who cried on her last day because she had 5 different levels to teach in her grade. Kids that were two grades behind and kids were two grades ahead were in her class and she was at school adjusting her lesson plan for each group, over and over and over again. People complained that her class was disruptive because she was a bad teacher. ”

Exactly. It is not reasonable to expect teachers to manage a pacing diversity that wide. And it does not work. That is just the fact.

I actually had that kind of pacing in my ES back and I loved it (we had a flexible grouping structure where you could pre-test into other teachers' classes so it wasn't the same teacher nightmare you described--there was a team of teachers across multiple grades so each teacher wasn't trying to individually differentiate--students would take a pre-assessment and then would go to an appropriate level grouping). But they didn't think through what happens after you finish the ES curriculum and are too young for MS--so I just basically hung out in the library working on my own with one other kid in the same boat for over a year for most academic content and then went to MS a year early anyway. I also think I passed things often because I could intuit tests well but would have benefited from more solidified review even if I scored perfect on a pre-assessment. It was a hard adjustment after that to go back to teachers telling me what to do in MS and had I not been on sports teams and in dance, it would have been rough socially.

Anonymous wrote:Western culture, and Western science is obsessed with their western empirical experiments. Everything has to be measured, and there has to be a control. It is Euro Western centric way to think. And the idiotic Individual builds his own destiny rhetoric that has never been true. Accepting narrow minded approach to learning in the U.S. has stifled any intellectual growth. If you can't measure it it is not real attitude. It is nothing but BS.

Omigosh, yes, I’ve often thought something similar!!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe that's why Fairfax has an "advanced academic" program, not "gifted." Surely you acknowledge some kids are academically advanced.
That said, I'm pretty sure Mozart was gifted.

I do not see any need for such a program in public school. I believe they are all just a waste of money. It makes little difference in the long run if one kid or 100 kids are doing "advanced math." What do they gain by doing math ahead of dumb kids? They all end up in the same pot eventually. Perhaps US curriculum is dumbed down?

And that is where you are wrong. Children don't "all end up in the same [s]pot eventually". Different professions require different emphasis.

Why is it always the most unremarkable people who are so insistent that their child is ‘gifted’?

In England where we currently live primary schools are predominantly small and extremely local ie a primary school will have about ~100 kids enrolled in the school total and one class per grade. There are no gifted classes. Teachers must differentiate and somehow do a great job. For math there was 1,2, and 3 star math. My dd finished 3 star math. Easily and worked on challenging word problems. Two blocks of math everyday, arithmetic and problem solving.

A few things: kids were encouraged to have 100% attendance. Parents are fined if they take their child out of school for anything except maybe a wedding or funeral. Kids are also kicked out of their school for poor behavior. Your typical primary school can handle special needs to only a certain extent. Disruptive behavior wasn’t tolerated at all. School starts at age 4 and literacy and numeracy is hit hard. It is also really common for a teacher to work part time and split a class with a colleague. This makes it easier for parents to work as teachers. It also makes it easier to keep up with the demands of differentiating.

These are just my observations. In England they don’t talk about giftedness. One of my kids has a WISC with scores well above the gifted threshold and they really aren’t interested. Yet her needs seem to be met.

“I had a teacher friend who cried on her last day because she had 5 different levels to teach in her grade. Kids that were two grades behind and kids were two grades ahead were in her class and she was at school adjusting her lesson plan for each group, over and over and over again. People complained that her class was disruptive because she was a bad teacher. ”

Exactly. It is not reasonable to expect teachers to manage a pacing diversity that wide. And it does not work. That is just the fact.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This problem and I believe it is one - of lack of differentiation in class and it could be solved but would take radically revamping our education system.

Oh what a glorious thing it would have been for me and my siblings as well as my own kids to have been able to move at our own pace. We could have graduated early or moved on to college level work while in high school in subject matters we excelled at - wouldn't that be great if everyone could move on with the subject matter as it was mastered. Some of us learn it deeply and retain it the first time it is experienced/taught to us.

Your Post made me flinch. I had a friend who taught in a class with a program that let students move on to the next unit when they were ready. It was hell for her. She was constantly teaching multiple units. Hectic doesn’t begin to describe it. She quit. Sounds great on paper, but it was terrible in practice.

+100

I had a teacher friend who cried on her last day because she had 5 different levels to teach in her grade. Kids that were two grades behind and kids were two grades ahead were in her class and she was at school adjusting her lesson plan for each group, over and over and over again. People complained that her class was disruptive because she was a bad teacher.

Anonymous wrote:Eastern Europe is a paragon of education worldwide. Haha.

+10000

Anonymous wrote:Disruptive kids are a whole other issue. This was not common back when I was in school. If a teacher called your parents to tell them you were disruptive, you'd get the shit beaten out of you. Parents beat first, and did not ask questions later! I am not saying this was ok, but today parents are more likely to "beat" the teacher and excuse their kids. Go back to basics, you don't need special programs because kids are gifted, you are saying you need them because kids are disruptive. Parenting fail, we need to go back to basics. Why not have a class for kids who behave and want to learn regardless of their perceived "gifted" status which is utterly arbitrary?

Wow. This is horrifying on so many levels.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the moment you label children as 'gifted', they (possibly) decide they don't need to put in the effort. Children not labeled gifted (possibly) decide that no amount of hard work would make any difference. Lose - lose both ways right?

If so, then this would mean that the AAP system is fundamentally flawed, not because it segregates 'smarter' kids from 'not-smarter' kids, but because it labels them as such. If the separation was interest based (stem / humanities / sports), that might be a better, less destructive way to operate.

It's why a lot of parents choose LLIV.

This being said: I know that kids are aware of whether or not they are in the AAP class and that the ones that aren't really work hard to get to that level in the end. Do all AAP kids succeed or strive for greatness? Nope. But the added benefit is when they see other smart kids, they don't want to be the dumb one in the pact.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh, and my sister is one of these high IQ people. Nobody in my Eastern European school paid it much attention. We were all in the same class, "smartest to stupidest," still are back there. No parents ever paid it any attention. My parents never spoke about her "genius." Nor did any other parents, she was just a kid, like any other kid. No parents ever commented on the kids that struggled, never. I think this is changing there, and has been changing in the last 15 years. So, she went to math competitions and to Vienna for some kids in science thing. This is a very U.S. thing to me. I don't get the fixation, I don't get the gifted class before HS, and even then. We had HS that you compete to get into, everyone knew what is a grammar school and what is a trade high school. It is the worst stupidity in my mind. Kids that learn stand out, no matter what.

On the one hand you are saying nothing was different for your gifted sister, but on the other hand she (and not you) was given the opportunity to go "to math competitions and to Vienna for some kids in science thing" and you had competitive entry high schools and trade schools.

Yes, I guess. But, she was never called gifted, or a genius, and all the way through 8th grade she was in the same class with the same kids from grade 1. The only things they would do is recommend to parents to have her skip a grade, she also started a year early 1st grade. I competed in other things, Museum art competitions, piano recitals, etc.. Other kids competed in sports, nobody classified it. There were opportunities there for the taking, but no classification in school was given and no different curriculum. Until HS.

It sounds like your sister was gifted but your parents have made the choice to never talk about it. I know that as a parent, I don't talk about it with my kid and we know that the teachers don't either.

I know now in Europe they track kids and now separate them by achievement. If you think AAP is bad here, it's bad there too, but it's just everywhere now.

Anonymous wrote:Excellence requires hard work. The problem is that some kids don’t face any challenges in the regular classroom. Every kid needs to be challenged and learn how to work hard and persevere. IMO, that’s why we need AAP or similar programs. So kids can’t just coast along and get As without any effort.

+1

It prepares them for college and eases them in gently.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe that's why Fairfax has an "advanced academic" program, not "gifted." Surely you acknowledge some kids are academically advanced.
That said, I'm pretty sure Mozart was gifted.

I do not see any need for such a program in public school. I believe they are all just a waste of money. It makes little difference in the long run if one kid or 100 kids are doing "advanced math." What do they gain by doing math ahead of dumb kids? They all end up in the same pot eventually. Perhaps US curriculum is dumbed down?

They really don't end up in the same pot though. Some will take multiple AP courses and score 4s and 5s, some will go on to TJ, some to highly selective colleges,. Others will not take any APs, get a basic degree or certificate of completion and maybe not go to college or to NOVA or a non-selective school. They really don't "end up in the same pot."

+1