Gifted/Talented -or- Just Another School District Failure

I have been engaged in a constant battle since my son was in third grade (perhaps second) to try to make sure that he was being challenged. Pre-K through second, the issue was not as bad because he was at a Montessori school, and because the results were usually pretty transparent. It was clear to me that he was learning. In third grade, at the same Montessori, we found that he was frequently kept from advancing because of silly procedural issues. He didn't memorize phonics marks because he found it pointless, so he could not advance to the next "level" of spelling words. Well, clearly he had outgrown this particular way of learning, which should be permissible in a Montessori curriculum. Heck! A traditional Montessori curriculum wouldn't have had them taking traditional spelling tests anyway. So rather than keeping him there for 4th grade, we sent him to the only Catholic school in the area, which was $100/month less than his Montessori for parishoners in the area (though we paid 12 months rather than 9, which makes up part of that difference), with terrible results. The teacher was demeaning & incompetent. The principal refused to admit the problem, until she stood to lose 4+ students, all from the same teacher's class! So while the students still have to put up with this teacher, they put up with her for fewer hours in the day. We left early last year, a decision I chronicle here and here. So we decided to move into the "good" school district--the one with "exemplary" schools rather than schools that are struggling to meet the state's minimum requirements. The only other option would have been the local Episcopal school, which has a nifty college prep curriculum but a hefty price tag. I also suspected that my son would be at an academic disadvantage because of his recent bad educational experiences. At St. Parish School, he was held to the lowest standard of mediocrity--marginally better than the schools in the district, but not at all impressive. Case in point--they issued him a final report card with all A's for a 6-week period in which he did not attend the school.

So we begin a new school year with hope that things will be better. So far, it has been acceptable. I have had to get to the bottom of reports of threats for talking, etc., but I have found that what the teacher sees as a "warning," my son takes as a "threat," and I have accepted that this is just something to get used to. :P What has been more difficult is the fact that, while he is held to a slightly higher standard of mediocrity, and has more interesting school work, which provides a teeny bit more motivation, he is still, for all practical purposes, bored & unmotivated. Except in orchestra, which may be the saving grace of this school year.

I know it is a hotly debated educational issue, but I have problems with classes that are not divided by ability. I see no reason why slower and more advanced students alike should be held to middle-of-the-road standards. It creates resentment and impedes learning for all but those deemed to be "average"--whatever that means!! The concept of an "average" child is itself misguided. But that's how public schools operate, even when there is an acknowledgment that some students are more advanced. Here, there is no such acknowledgment. There is Enrichment Math, for which I can only assume he did not qualify, since I have heard nothing about a nomination, and Gifted and Talented (G/T).

Now, I know all about G/T. I know the philosophies behind it, the testing procedures, the characteristics of a G/T child. I was in G/T from 2nd grade until I graduated from high school. I always expected that my son would qualify or, if not, that he would come very close, or fit the intelligence requirements but perhaps not the personality requirements (for lack of a better word). You see, as my husband & I have discussed, there are traits beyond intelligence that qualify one for G/T, and these generally have a negative side. G/T students are self-motivated prefer to work alone: interpret--antisocial and procrastinators. They have "alternative" ways of experiencing the world: interpret--unorganized. My husband was never tested for G/T, having been in the Catholic school system from the beginning. G/T students (to prevent them form getting snotty) were always told that G/T has "nothing to do with intelligence" (which is partially true). It has to do with critical thinking/logic and creativity. Honors, therefore, is something different. I was honors and G/T (the two are often complimentary). We agree that my husband, the much more social and organized of the two of us, was/is "Honors," and in many things more advanced than I.

My son is likely a combination, though it is difficult for me, as a parent, to anticipate whether he leans more to the G/T side or not. I would like to think so, in part because it would explain the laziness--G/T students require a different kind of motivation and give up if they feel something is not worth their while (I know), but there are few opportunities for me to observe such things. I tried, therefore, to have my son tested during the testing period last school year (roughly March or April 2007), at the end of 4th grade. However, since he was out of the school system, he was tested instead at the beginning of this year. The test consisted of the Iowa Test of Basic Skills (a pretty "standard" standardized test--ha ha--that he took in 3rd grade with good results) and a Cognitive Abilities Test, of which I know little. In addition, I filled out an extensive questionnaire about personality traits that we have noticed. Unfortunately, his scores were very low. Not below the 50th percentile, but lower than I would have expected. I received a form letter with his scores and an empty promise that there would be other enrichment opportunities, yada yada, blah blah blah. Naturally, I questioned. And expressed my doubts that there would be any other opportunity for challenge, since there is no acknowledgment of advanced abilities in the classroom. The reply came today.

And the basic problem is that this school district sees G/T testing as a matter of knowledge rather than innate ability (or potential to learn) and critical thinking. The ITBS test he took was the one normally administered at the end of 6th grade. So as a beginning 5th grader, he was expected to score above 96% of the students who take the test--students who, unlike my son, have had the benefit of the 5th and 6th grade curricula! This, of, course, explained why his scores seemed artificially low. Rather than testing for innate ability, he was being tested on concepts--and the jump from 4th grade to the end of 6th is considerable. So unless I or his previous school had been teaching him on an advanced level already, which I/they were not doing, he would have had no chance of passing the test.

The teacher administering the test made it clear that I was the one who requested the testing be done at the beginning of the year rather than wait until the Spring. Well, yes, as I wanted him to have the benefit of a challenge this year rather than wait until 6th grade. Why shouldn't I? Should I be willing to squander another year of his already disappointing education while I wait for the standard testing period? Apparently, yes. You see, this admonition had the sound of an admission that the testing for in-district students was easier than for transfers from another school district. After all, they are tested one year in advance of where they are. In March of this year, my son was in 4th, and would likely have been given the 5th grade test. However, in September of this year, he is in 5th grade, and therefore (without the benefit of another years' education) was given the 6th grade test. So he is handicapped from the beginning, fails the test, and I look like another quack parent who can't accept that her child is not as smart as she thinks. And on top of that, I get a lecture on the different between a "percentage" and a "percentile." Because no one who didn't major in education can possibly understand that difference!

So she directs my above-average, not-being-challenged, finishes-all-of-his-homework-in-class child to optional after school "clubs" like the "Scrabble" club. My response: that I expect the education to occur during school hours. My conclusion: education is a battle. No matter where you go. If you are a parent who cares, that is, or has high standards. At least there is orchestra.

Homeschoolers: Chalk all of this up to another reason to continue what you are doing.