Who Are the "Gifted" Children --- and How Should Schools Handle Them?
A "gifted" child in one community might not be "gifted" in another community. Should the "gifted" label be standardized across communities? Do "gifted" children deserve the same extra attention that other children with special labels get? Education World addresses those and other questions.
It happened again yesterday. I walked into a room and, when asked what
I did, I mentioned that I taught the gifted. What a reaction! There is
so much controversy surrounding gifted education. Some virulently attack
it as elitist. Others just as staunchly support it. Perhaps it would be
a less contentious issue if educators could just agree on which group of
a school's population we are referring to when we say the word "gifted."
Gifted students are those in the top 3 percent of the school's population.
That's how Patti Bricker, the coordinator of gifted programs in Grove City,
Ohio, defined gifted students in a recent NEA Today article, Are
Too Many Kids Labeled Gifted? (January, 1998). In the same article,
Roberta Braverman, the vice president of the New Jersey Association for
Gifted Children, defined them as those who represent the top 5 to 10 percent
of the population. That is quite a difference right there! A student who
functions in the top 3 percent of the population may have very different
educational needs from those of a student who functions within the 10th
percentile. Additionally, some school districts adhere to the concept of
Howard Gardner's multiple intelligence, so students in those districts
who perform in the top percentile of the population in nonacademic areas
like leadership or the visual or performing arts are identified as gifted.
If educators cannot agree on who the gifted are that they are trying
to serve, how can they agree on what is the most appropriate education
for them?
Bricker expresses the fear that by defining "gifted" too broadly, and
including too many students under the gifted label, the curriculum a school
offers to meet all these needs could become very diluted. The fear is that
a program that tries to meet too many needs frequently meets no one's needs
well.
Broad-based programs that reach many students are expensive, too. In
difficult times gifted education is frequently the first to be cut. Perhaps
programs that have kept their costs in check and can demonstrate their
effectiveness may be left intact even in those times when school districts
must restrict spending.
A DOUBLE STANDARD?
Meri Kock, an eighth-grade math and algebra teacher at Park View Intermediate
School in Lancaster, Calif., expressed her thoughts about gifted kids this
way on a recent middle school listserv posting:
"Resource students have an identified learning disability.
They get extra help. Special teachers, special classes, and accommodations
made to help them deal with their specific learning need. Gifted students
have an identified learning benefit; they have extra talents, special needs
... Should the gifted student receive just as much support, time, and quality
programs as those with identified learning problems? Are we setting a double
standard?"
"It just seems to me that the resource student and the gifted student are
opposite sides of the same coin and each needs special programs to fully
develop what they have to offer," Kock told Education World. "The resource
student gets it by state mandate ... the gifted student is supposed to learn
to get along with others and 'handle it.'"
After all, don't gifted students reap huge benefits from the intellectual
challenge, peer interaction, psychosocial support, and intervention techniques
found in gifted programs?
Another listserv participant offered her thoughts: Gifted students need
to learn to get along with those who are not gifted, she said.
True -- gifted students live in an "average" world, and they need to
get along in it. One best learns a foreign language by being immersed in
that language. Does a gifted child best learn how to interact with those
who are not gifted by being in classes with children who are not gifted?
OR SHOULD THE BAR BE RAISED FOR ALL?
Jonathan Plucker, assistant professor of learning, cognition, and instruction
at Indiana University, points out in a recent Education Week article, Is
Gifted Education Still Viable? (3/11/98), that like many academically
accelerated countries in Asia, Eastern European countries provide no gifted
educational services. Instead they raise the bar for all students, expecting
the average to attain a higher level rather than siphoning off the brightest
and accepting mediocrity from the rest.
Frequently those who argue for a differentiated curriculum for the gifted
cannot agree on what programs best meet that group of students' needs.
-
Some believe the education provided the gifted should be academic acceleration.
Others believe in enrichment.
-
Some believe exemplary gifted education is an honors/gifted program where
high-achievers and identified gifted are taught together. Others believe
in inclusion, a program in which gifted students are provided extra enrichment
within the regular classroom.
-
Some believe an exemplary gifted education can be provided by a pull-out
program where the gifted leave their classrooms and go to another room
or off-campus site for their gifted instruction.
Also to be considered is how well do after-school, weekend, or summer programs
for the gifted work? Could it be that some gifted programs might be more
effective for one grade level than another, that one type of program might
not work equally well for all grades?
ARE STUDENTS BENFITTING?
According to an Atlanta Business Chronicle article, State
Studies Ways to Revamp Gifted Programs, during a state audit in September
1997 the Georgia Department of Education realized that they had no procedures
to gauge whether or not public school students in gifted programs were
actually benefiting from the curriculum provided. The audit uncovered insufficiencies
in operating guidelines and standards. As a result, the Board of Education
is now considering new amendments to spell out requirements for teacher
certification, classroom structure, the level and pace of lessons, teacher
planning time, and other methods to evaluate a school's gifted program.
The Board wants schools to be able to show how the special services they
provide gifted students meet the students' special needs.
Many educators consider Georgia's gifted program to be an excellent
one; it has been in place for a long time, and they only now have realized
that they were not evaluating their program's effectiveness. One can only
guess how many other gifted programs are not measuring their effectiveness.
The National Education Association is conducting a survey to discover
the general population's thoughts about gifted education. What are your
feelings about gifted education as it exists today? Do you think too many
are labeled gifted? Check out the NEA Today Web site to discover the results of this
survey.
ADDITIONAL "GIFTED" RESOURCES ON THE WEB
-
National Association of Gifted Children
This site -- of interest to administrators, teachers, and parents -- provides
access to current and past issues of Gifted Child Quarterly, Parenting
for High Potential, and other NAGC publications.
-
National Research Center on the Gifted
and Talented This site is a super source. It links to The Gifted
Education Press; provides information about summer programs, and a
mentor connection; and, as an extra bonus, offers students in grades 4
through college the opportunity to find same-age overseas pen pals who
are looking for someone to correspond with in English.
Article by Glori Chaika
Education World®
Copyright © 1998 Education World
Related Articles from Education
World
11/02/1998
|
