« The Disadvantages of an Elite Education | Main | At Some KIPP Schools, KIPPster-ettes Outnumber KIPPsters »

With New Rules for Gifted Programs, NYC's Poor and Minority Students Lose Out

If you'd ever bumped your head up against test score distributions for entering kindergarteners, you already knew that NYC's shift to a uniform cutoff for gifted admissions - the 90th percentile - could only hurt poor and minority kids' access to gifted programs. So many of you were unsurprised in April when I analyzed the new gifted and talented data, and found that poor and minority kids' access to gifted and talented programs had been seriously diminished. (See maps here.)

Kudos to Elissa Gootman and Robert Gebeloff at the New York Times, who pushed the G&T issue out onto center stage this morning (Gifted Programs in the City are Less Diverse):

An analysis by The New York Times shows that under the new policy, children from the city’s poorest districts were offered a smaller percentage than last year of the entry-grade gifted slots in elementary schools. Children in the city’s wealthiest districts captured a greater share of the slots.

Considered alongside Fordham's report on high achieving students and Stanford prof Sean Reardon's finding that the black-white grows faster among the highest achieving students, these losses in G&T seats should not be taken lightly. Because of NYC's stark residential segregation, high achieving minority students are more likely to attend schools populated by low-achieving students than are high achieving white students. Robert Pondiscio has done a great job educating us about how this unfolds in New York City classrooms, "The 'not your problem' kids walk in smart and walk out smart, largely by accident of birth. While they’re in school, they are nearly completely neglected, and as a result achieve not nearly as much as they would have (while still testing at or above grade level on dumbed-down state tests) had they not been starved for oxygen in an underperforming school, where they were constantly praised for being bright, but had few demands placed upon them, and where opportunities for enrichment, in or out of school, were non-existent."

Let's hope that those concerned with "educational equity" revise the admissions policy for next year. Here's what I'd like to see: If we want to increase access to advanced instruction for disadvantaged kids who are more advanced than their peers, we might consider offering gifted slots to the top 5% of students in each community school district, while also guaranteeing a seat for any student who scores in the 90th percentile or above of the national distribution. This is analogous to states' top 4% (California) or top 10% (Texas) plans for college admissions, which guarantee college admission to students who have excelled in their own high schools. Thoughts?

When I saw this morning's New York Times headline, I half expected to see you quoted for your earlier posts.

What I would like to see is a study that showed the effectiveness of gifted programs. In my experience with gifted programs, they are worthless at increasing the performance of high performers.

My observation is that gifted programs have become nothing more than an education bauble used to signify status for schools and parents alike.

Instead of our antiquated gifted programs, which try and adopt a one size fits all program to educating a diverse population of high performers, I propose revamping the whole system.

Let's create accelerated subject specific classes with well defined higher standards, then open them for enrollment to all students regardless of test scores, sort of like AP classes, but for lower grades. These classes would have to be demanding, but reasonably paced. This would reward effort over intelligence while still improving performance at the higher end.

To help diversity in these classes, we could rely on recruiting efforts and also provide tutoring. Perhaps even automatically enroll the top 10% of students in the school.

Students who weren't willing to do the work or couldn't keep up would be placed back in regular courses with no penalties. This is key, because the no penalties rule would encourage more students to be willing to at least attempt the courses.

While not a panacea for gifted education equality issues, this program would at least remove all test score barriers replace a program with no defined objectives to one with defined goals.

Or not...

Its sad that we track our students at such a young age at all. I can understand tracking in high school, after students have had time to prove their ability, but to start tracking in kindergarten really sets up low expectations for kids who haven't even had a chance to show that their hard work can overcome initial disparities.

NYC's policy represents a dangerous, indeed race and class-biased, return to IQ-ism. This combines the belief that those who have not learned X at a given age are "slow learners" with the belief that a limited set of items constructed in a particular social setting represent "intelligence" and thus the ability to learn.

Selecting a top percentage of test-scorers in any given community may help address the race/class inequity, but at best only partially. And it will perpetuate the dangerous illusion that a score on an IQ-type test (or a standardized achievement test)is an adequate basis for determining who can learn well.

A trly progressive approach to schooling would ensure each child a real opportunity to learn, to be engaged and supported and challenged. The best practices of "gifted and talented" could be used in this way, for all kids, not just a few, regardless of how selected.

Carol: why assume younger kids haven't had an opportunity to prove their ability? A two-year-old I know can talk in complete sentences, with prepositional phrases and subordinate clauses, expressing chains of logical reasoning. I was reading by preschool and doing second-grade math in kindergarten. I didn't end up in the local public schools because the principal couldn't grasp the idea of a kid who could read *and* do math, and all he could think of was "we could...give her more worksheets?"

I do think we need a flexible system that takes into account that passion and discipline count for as much as intelligence in the long run, but the intellectual differences among very young children can be tremendously pronounced, and young children, just as much as older ones, deserve appropriate and challenging curriculum.

Comments are now closed for this post.


Recent Comments

  • Andromeda: Carol: why assume younger kids haven't had an opportunity to read more
  • Monty Neill: NYC's policy represents a dangerous, indeed race and class-biased, return read more
  • Carol: Its sad that we track our students at such a read more
  • rory @ parentalcation: What I would like to see is a study that read more
  • Morgan: When I saw this morning's New York Times headline, I read more




Technorati search

» Blogs that link here


8th grade retention
Fordham Foundation
The New Teacher Project
Tim Daly
absent teacher reserve
absent teacher reserve

accountability in Texas
accountability systems in education
achievement gap
achievement gap in New York City
acting white
AERA annual meetings
AERA conference
Alexander Russo
Algebra II
American Association of University Women
American Education Research Associatio
American Education Research Association
American Educational Research Journal
American Federation of Teachers
Andrew Ho
Art Siebens
Baltimore City Public Schools
Barack Obama
Bill Ayers
black-white achievement gap
books on educational research
boy crisis
brain-based education
Brian Jacob
bubble kids
Building on the Basics
Cambridge Education
carnival of education
Caroline Hoxby
Caroline Hoxby charter schools
cell phone plan
charter schools
Checker Finn
Chicago shooting
Chicago violence
Chris Cerf
class size
Coby Loup
college access
cool people you should know
credit recovery
curriculum narrowing
Dan Willingham
data driven
data-driven decision making
data-driven decision-making
David Cantor
Dean Millot
demographics of schoolchildren
Department of Assessment and Accountability
Department of Education budget
Diplomas Count
disadvantages of elite education
do schools matter
Doug Ready
Doug Staiger
dropout factories
dropout rate
education books
education policy
education policy thinktanks
educational equity
educational research
educational triage
effects of neighborhoods on education
effects of No Child Left Behind
effects of schools
effects of Teach for America
elite education
Everyday Antiracism
excessed teachers
exit exams
experienced teachers
Fordham and Ogbu
Fordham Foundation
Frederick Douglass High School
Gates Foundation
gender and education
gender and math
gender and science and mathematics
gifted and talented
gifted and talented admissions
gifted and talented program
gifted and talented programs in New York City
girls and math
good schools
graduate student union
graduation rate
graduation rates
guns in Chicago
health benefits for teachers
High Achievers
high school
high school dropouts
high school exit exams
high school graduates
high school graduation rate
high-stakes testing
high-stakes tests and science
higher ed
higher education
highly effective teachers
Houston Independent School District
how to choose a school
incentives in education
Institute for Education Sciences
is teaching a profession?
is the No Child Left Behind Act working
Jay Greene
Jim Liebman
Joel Klein
John Merrow
Jonah Rockoff
Kevin Carey
KIPP and boys
KIPP and gender
Lake Woebegon
Lars Lefgren
leaving teaching
Leonard Sax
Liam Julian

Marcus Winters
math achievement for girls
meaning of high school diploma
Mica Pollock
Michael Bloomberg
Michelle Rhee
Michelle Rhee teacher contract
Mike Bloomberg
Mike Klonsky
Mike Petrilli
narrowing the curriculum
National Center for Education Statistics Condition of Education
new teachers
New York City
New York City bonuses for principals
New York City budget
New York City budget cuts
New York City Budget cuts
New York City Department of Education
New York City Department of Education Truth Squad
New York City ELA and Math Results 2008
New York City gifted and talented
New York City Progress Report
New York City Quality Review
New York City school budget cuts
New York City school closing
New York City schools
New York City small schools
New York City social promotion
New York City teacher experiment
New York City teacher salaries
New York City teacher tenure
New York City Test scores 2008
New York City value-added
New York State ELA and Math 2008
New York State ELA and Math Results 2008
New York State ELA and Math Scores 2008
New York State ELA Exam
New York state ELA test
New York State Test scores
No Child Left Behind
No Child Left Behind Act
passing rates
picking a school
press office
principal bonuses
proficiency scores
push outs
qualitative educational research
qualitative research in education
quitting teaching
race and education
racial segregation in schools
Randall Reback
Randi Weingarten
Randy Reback
recovering credits in high school
Rick Hess
Robert Balfanz
Robert Pondiscio
Roland Fryer
Russ Whitehurst
Sarah Reckhow
school budget cuts in New York City
school choice
school effects
school integration
single sex education
small schools
small schools in New York City
social justice teaching
Sol Stern
Stefanie DeLuca
stereotype threat
talented and gifted
talking about race
talking about race in schools
Teach for America
teacher effectiveness
teacher effects
teacher quailty
teacher quality
teacher tenure
teachers and obesity
Teachers College
teachers versus doctors
teaching as career
teaching for social justice
teaching profession
test score inflation
test scores
test scores in New York City
testing and accountability
Texas accountability
The No Child Left Behind Act
The Persistence of Teacher-Induced Learning Gains
thinktanks in educational research
Thomas B. Fordham Foundation
Tom Kane
University of Iowa
Urban Institute study of Teach for America
Urban Institute Teach for America
value-added assessment
Wendy Kopp
women and graduate school science and engineering
women and science
women in math and science
Woodrow Wilson High School