Destroying education for the gifted.

[Si modo]

The goal is to destroy the programs for high achieving students.

Yes. It is completely in line with encouraging mediocrity. Mediocrity produces Useful Idiots.

The public school system was never intended to do anything else.

There was a time when I would have discounted a statement like that as a Konspiracy. Not now. We have the products as the majority and they are low-hanging fruit for the statists.

 

[whitehall]

Everyone gets the same public education in grammar school and high school. The "gifted" get scholarships to a secondary education or they go to private school. Case closed.

 

[Samson]

This is actually a pet peeve of mine. I don't believe in dumbing down the more gifted kids to accommodate the not-so-gifted. i remember when my son went into the G&T program at his middle school, there was talk about including kids who could sing.

But if you're a teacher, you know that teachers teach to the bottom third of the class. having less capable students in a gifted program drags the class down for the smarter kids.

the reality is that poverty and education don't go together well. that is why the answer is to reduce poverty, not put less able kids in a class with the kids who were reading harry potter when they were four. there are studies that show that programs like Head Start help close the gap. funding should be placed there instead of pushing square pegs into round holes.

imo... just my .02

Almost no one really qualifies for GT, or Special Ed, but the programs are popular for their little "perks;" smaller sized classes; specially trained teachers; FEDERAL FUNDING (usually at a rate vastly less than was originally intended).

Before you know it THE ENTIRE SCHOOL wants to be in a GT class or SpEd class. Kids that consistantly misbehave are suddenly diagnosed "Bipolar" or "Autistic" or "Unknown Personality Disorder" or some such similarly vague psycho-babble-bullshit that never existed before everyone began to climb on the SpEd bandwagon.

G&T and special ed are desireable b/c your kid doesn't get lost in the suffle. kids in the middle suffer.

i disagree wholeheartedly about kids not "really" qualifiying for G&T. That isn't true in my experience.

Not sure exactly what your experience is; the definition of "Gifted" implies that the population is necessarily not within the intellectual norm. Using IQ tests which set the standard deviation at 15 points from an average of 100, then 95% of the population falls inside the normal range (70-130). Even if I agree to, say, a 5% "Gifted" population instead of the more probable 2.5%, only 50 kids out of 1000 fall into this group, hardly enough to justify an entirely seperate educational program in a public school.

If parents don't want their GT kid to get lost in the shuffle, then they should qualify for educational grants and send them to specialized private campuses designed for their special needs.

 

[rdean]

Why do Republicans even care? Short answer? They don't.

The "gifted" don't believe science is a faith, evolution a lie and climate change a conspiracy. I suspect less than 6% of them would even admit to being a "Republican". Certainly no Republicans on this board would care to be called "gifted". That would make them "elite". They don't want "elite". They prefer beer.

 

[Jackson]

The students who are deemed exceptional are not labeled Republican or Democrat. The programs for the exceptional students have to be conformed to the individuls and not PC. If a student has a need, the schools must meet that need and care about nothing else.

The "gifted or talented" students need a classroom designed for them with an advanced curriculum. Not a one dy a week few hours of going on field trips. If you are going to do something, do it right! There should be not quota of black, white, asian,or at risk students. You are not doing anyne any favors. The tops student go to the school.. It's only common sense.

For students who have special needs, there are terrific teachers who specialize in their appropriate fields. Individualized plans are needed for the youngsters and they can meet gains that sometimes surpass the original classroom because of the small classroom and individual attention.

Do not place children who are not functioning in the normal curriculum successfully in the regular classroom. They need special attention and back up instruction to bring them up to level. They cannot get that in the regular classroom.

 

[whitehall]

Why do Republicans even care? Short answer? They don't.

The "gifted" don't believe science is a faith, evolution a lie and climate change a conspiracy. I suspect less than 6% of them would even admit to being a "Republican". Certainly no Republicans on this board would care to be called "gifted". That would make them "elite". They don't want "elite". They prefer beer.

We are talking about grammer shool kids dean. They ptobably have the same mental capacity as the average democrat politician but I doubt if the "gifted" kids identify a political affiliation yet. Give them couple more years and they might become little Obama chanting global warming nazis.

 

[Katzndogz]

Don't get me started! One of my students was accepted for the Gifted Program just as you described. I was horrified1 The letter announcing he was failing had already gone out. I had several conferences with the parents during the discussing his aptitude and work. A psychological had been done and his I.Q. was 71.

I went to the office and questioned the principal if an error had been made. Nope! The reason given to me was they needed to fill their quota of UNDERACHIEVING STUDENTS and he was good in art. I threw up my arms and left the room.

That's where we are going, folks.

This is actually a pet peeve of mine. I don't believe in dumbing down the more gifted kids to accommodate the not-so-gifted. i remember when my son went into the G&T program at his middle school, there was talk about including kids who could sing.

But if you're a teacher, you know that teachers teach to the bottom third of the class. having less capable students in a gifted program drags the class down for the smarter kids.

the reality is that poverty and education don't go together well. that is why the answer is to reduce poverty, not put less able kids in a class with the kids who were reading harry potter when they were four. there are studies that show that programs like Head Start help close the gap. funding should be placed there instead of pushing square pegs into round holes.

imo... just my .02

It sounds good, but it's just not true. Poverty has no impact on education. In fact, poverty if the subject of sufficient rebellion can improve education. There are plenty of people who so rejected poverty that they worked harder than anyone else to get out of it. There is really only ONE way into education and that's to care. The parents have to care, they have to impart this feeling to children so the children also care about and are interested in pursuing education. That's what we don't have. We have disinterested students who only want to play around with their friends and get high. We have parents who feel that their child is entitled to a good grade whether or not they can even read.

 

[Samson]

Don't get me started! One of my students was accepted for the Gifted Program just as you described. I was horrified1 The letter announcing he was failing had already gone out. I had several conferences with the parents during the discussing his aptitude and work. A psychological had been done and his I.Q. was 71.

I went to the office and questioned the principal if an error had been made. Nope! The reason given to me was they needed to fill their quota of UNDERACHIEVING STUDENTS and he was good in art. I threw up my arms and left the room.

That's where we are going, folks.

This is actually a pet peeve of mine. I don't believe in dumbing down the more gifted kids to accommodate the not-so-gifted. i remember when my son went into the G&T program at his middle school, there was talk about including kids who could sing.

But if you're a teacher, you know that teachers teach to the bottom third of the class. having less capable students in a gifted program drags the class down for the smarter kids.

the reality is that poverty and education don't go together well. that is why the answer is to reduce poverty, not put less able kids in a class with the kids who were reading harry potter when they were four. there are studies that show that programs like Head Start help close the gap. funding should be placed there instead of pushing square pegs into round holes.

imo... just my .02

Poverty has no impact on education.

You got anything to back-up this stupid notion, sparky, or did you just pull it out your arse?

 

[jillian]

The public school system was never intended to do anything else.

There was a time when I would have discounted a statement like that as a Konspiracy. Not now. We have the products as the majority and they are low-hanging fruit for the statists.[/QUOTE]

no. it's still nonsense. it's the right who fight educational standards and want to cut funds. so really, who is it low-hanging fruit for?

 

[jillian]

This is actually a pet peeve of mine. I don't believe in dumbing down the more gifted kids to accommodate the not-so-gifted. i remember when my son went into the G&T program at his middle school, there was talk about including kids who could sing.

But if you're a teacher, you know that teachers teach to the bottom third of the class. having less capable students in a gifted program drags the class down for the smarter kids.

the reality is that poverty and education don't go together well. that is why the answer is to reduce poverty, not put less able kids in a class with the kids who were reading harry potter when they were four. there are studies that show that programs like Head Start help close the gap. funding should be placed there instead of pushing square pegs into round holes.

imo... just my .02

Poverty has no impact on education.

You got anything to back-up this stupid notion, sparky, or did you just pull it out your arse?

of course she doesn't... and yes, she did.

 

[Samson]

The public school system was never intended to do anything else.

There was a time when I would have discounted a statement like that as a Konspiracy. Not now. We have the products as the majority and they are low-hanging fruit for the statists.

no. it's still nonsense. it's the right who fight educational standards and want to cut funds. so really, who is it low-hanging fruit for?[/QUOTE]

This quote is all screwed up.

I'll repeat myself: the Public Education System is a LOCAL construct in the USA which was originally intended to teach the average farmer's kid how to convert bushles of wheat into $$ and how to read a farmer's almanac. Naturally, with a World War going on, geography and civics became more necessary, but the curriculum was targeted at the average kid. The handicapped were completely ignored, except when there was a state school for the deaf, blind, or insane. "Gifted" kids read all the books at the library, went to work at the bank or wrote for the paper, and joined the military. If their parents were wealthy (very rare) then they went to private schools.

The public schools in the USA were never intended to educate the hadicapped or the gifted, which is why requiring these curricula is like asking someone to drive an 18 wheeler to Hawaii.

 

[2twsted4colorTV]

My sis is a teacher.

She is a right wing R and she can move these types of kids up two school years with her methods.

She is so good at it that her principle just ignores her methods because they are not the ones she is supposed to use.

She lives in florida.

A right wing owned state.

The right wishes kids to fail so they can distroy public education.

They make the system unworkable every place they own the school boards.

Why cant you guys find the same successs with your kids my sister finds?

Because you would rather see these kids as trash we should throw away.

How very chirstian of you

Well my daughter never had ANY teachers like your sister. All any of the teachers in her schools cared about were either the already gifted, photographic memory kids OR the athletic jocks. None of them, except I will say her 6th grade teacher, who had also taught in Japan, had a clue how to teach a child something when they did not posess a photographic memory.

The teachers today are consumed with discipline issues and usually are not given the freedom to teach the way your sisters does. If every teacher taught like she does, kids might just learn something. But she is in the minority. That is the stupidest thing in the world that right wingers wish kids to fail. In the elementary grades if the parents are not cooperative and encouraging, all but the very brightest kids fall through the cracks. I was involved in my daughter's education the whole way. But I feel like I failed her -- I should have home schooled her, but in the 1980s this was really not widely available or doable. I want everyone to be the best they can be. I think graduation from high school should be a requirement, not just to the 8th grade. Maybe we should look at the education system in Japan. They have one of the highest literacy rates in the world. And everyone works hard there and long hours.

 

[HUGGY]

Destroying education for the gifted.

That is a stupid statement. The "gifted" will find a way to learn. It is their nature.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RiU2T4Psyc]"Galileo" Indigo Girls - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Samson]

Destroying education for the gifted.

That is a stupid statement. The "gifted" will find a way to learn. It is their nature.

This is why frugal public school systems never put much emphasis on G&T curriculum until integration, and then G&T programs were invented as an alternative for parents who considered their kids part of an elite group that deserved a higher level of education.

 

[Katzndogz]

This is actually a pet peeve of mine. I don't believe in dumbing down the more gifted kids to accommodate the not-so-gifted. i remember when my son went into the G&T program at his middle school, there was talk about including kids who could sing.

But if you're a teacher, you know that teachers teach to the bottom third of the class. having less capable students in a gifted program drags the class down for the smarter kids.

the reality is that poverty and education don't go together well. that is why the answer is to reduce poverty, not put less able kids in a class with the kids who were reading harry potter when they were four. there are studies that show that programs like Head Start help close the gap. funding should be placed there instead of pushing square pegs into round holes.

imo... just my .02

Poverty has no impact on education.

You got anything to back-up this stupid notion, sparky, or did you just pull it out your arse?

Money does not help improve scholastic scores. For some people, living in poverty is an incentive to escape into better lives through education. It makes no sense to Americans. It makes sense to millions of Chinese and Indians. I don't expect you to understand that.

 

[psikeyhackr]

Destroying education for the gifted.

That is a stupid statement. The "gifted" will find a way to learn. It is their nature.

This is why frugal public school systems never put much emphasis on G&T curriculum until integration, and then G&T programs were invented as an alternative for parents who considered their kids part of an elite group that deserved a higher level of education.

A way to learn what, how fast. If some of them them get a mile ahead of the pack they are called "gifted". With just a little help they could have gone ten miles and there might be 5 times as many.

Would a National Recommended Reading List cost too much?

psik

 

[Katzndogz]

The ONLY improvement children show in education is when their parents care and they care. It doesn't matter whether they are poor or rich. There are plenty of failing rich kids. Look at Al Gore!

Running away from this doesn't help.

 

[Samson]

Poverty has no impact on education.

You got anything to back-up this stupid notion, sparky, or did you just pull it out your arse?

Money does not help improve scholastic scores. For some people, living in poverty is an incentive to escape into better lives through education. It makes no sense to Americans. It makes sense to millions of Chinese and Indians. I don't expect you to understand that.

Um...I was asking if you could produce any authorative source that agrees with you.

Apparently the question went over your head.

 

[Samson]

Destroying education for the gifted.

That is a stupid statement. The "gifted" will find a way to learn. It is their nature.

This is why frugal public school systems never put much emphasis on G&T curriculum until integration, and then G&T programs were invented as an alternative for parents who considered their kids part of an elite group that deserved a higher level of education.

A way to learn what, how fast. If some of them them get a mile ahead of the pack they are called "gifted". With just a little help they could have gone ten miles and there might be 5 times as many.

Would a National Recommended Reading List cost too much?

psik

Do you really think that a kid that is gifted needs a reading list? Or, that a reading list would inspire anyone to read more than public libraries?

Is there ANYTHING that isn't offered over the internet that a Gifted kid cannot access??

No.

The only justification for G&T programs today is to force public school systems to budget a program that satisfies parents who want to segregate their kids from the system's General Population which includes the poor and the dark.

 

[psikeyhackr]

A way to learn what, how fast. If some of them them get a mile ahead of the pack they are called "gifted". With just a little help they could have gone ten miles and there might be 5 times as many.

Would a National Recommended Reading List cost too much?

psik

Do you really think that a kid that is gifted needs a reading list? Or, that a reading list would inspire anyone to read more than public libraries?

Is there ANYTHING that isn't offered over the internet that a Gifted kid cannot access??

No.

The only justification for G&T programs today is to force public school systems to budget a program that satisfies parents who want to segregate their kids from the system's General Population which includes the poor and the dark.

"90% of everything is crud!" - Theodore Sturgeon

Before the invention of the printing press keeping people ignorant was not a problem. They could not read. Now we have a new method of promoting ignorance. Bombard people with bullsh#. Most of the Internet is bullsh#.

Partly because SF reviews are so bad and partly to just save a little money I decided to read a lot of the free science fiction in Project Gutenberg. At a guess I would say maybe 20% of it is worth the time to read. Stuff written in the last 20 years is worse in my opinion because they have changed the definition so much that lots of stuff called science fiction ain't.

But then there is the problem of information priority. I worked for IBM for years. Never ran across the term von Neumann machine even though IBM hired John von Neumann in 1952. So how could all of their computers be von Neumann machines and yet it is not mentioned? We live in a society where more people do not want to spread good info then want to spread it but grade school kids don't know that yet. So a good reading list that did not waste their time on junk could have a huge effect. I would guess the "gifted" kids would use it more. So it should have an amplifying effect.

How many kids read Harry Potter?

I would say this is better.
The Fourth R by George O. Smith
"The Fourth R" by Smith George Oliver Free Download. The book is added by David (Idaho) Read online books at OnRead.com.

And it's free. Sure it's out there on the Internet to be found but how many would. It is lost in the NOISE.

psik