Join our editorial board by applying here or become a columnist at the Spectator by clicking here.
New Criteria for Gifted Program Proposed
PUBLISHED NOVEMBER 1, 2007
New York City Schools’ Chancellor Joel Klein has announced a plan to restrict admission to Gifted and Talented programs in public schools to students who score in the top 5 percent on standardized tests.
The current admission system has been criticized as being inequitable and subjective. The DoE has used the Otis-Lennon School Ability Test in conjunction with the Gifted Rating Scale to rank pre-kindergarten students for admission to the programs. Some parents complained that this method was inequitable because they felt the GRS was subjective.
If Klein’s plan is enacted, the DoE will replace GRS with the Bracken School Readiness Assessment and continue to administer the OLSAT. Students who take both tests will receive a combined score, with the OLSAT counting for 75 percent. Students with a combined score in the top 5 percent will receive a Gifted and Talented application.
“Today, there’s limited access to gifted and talented education in some districts. The opposite is true in other districts,” Klein said in a press release. “We want to create universal opportunity—and dramatically increase the numbers of students testing for, and hopefully entering, gifted and talented programs. We also want to make sure we’re applying a clear, citywide standard for ‘giftedness’ so that families can be sure we’re teaching their gifted children to a rigorous, consistent standard.”
But not all parents think the new plan is actually more equitable. “EVERY CHILD DESERVES AN ENRICHED EDUCATIONAL EXPERIENCE!!!!!” Paul Mondesire, parent, wrote in an e-mail to a listserv of neighborhood parents. “Allocating resources in this manner in the name of ‘fairness’ comes off as misdirected given the lack of substantive proof that culling the top 5% of children who score high on a given assessment is an accurate predictor of their ability to think critically or their future academic success.”
Klein called for feedback from parents and the DoE will hold a town hall meeting in each borough. The Panel for Educational Policy will vote on the plan at its November meeting.
Joy Resmovits can be reached at joy.resmovits@columbiaspectator.com.
Article Tools:
View Comments ( 16)
Post a Comment
My point is that the only parts of the public school system that get attention and funding are those that cater to the wealthy and powerful - yes, the elites (yes, whites and foreigners as you correctly point out.) It doesn't happen only in private schools.That DEFINITELY leaves poor and black people off the chart. Just look at the schools on Long Island.
In an egalitarian society, the public would never abandon public education. That only 5% of our students are treated as "gifted" makes one wonder if this 5% is all public school will ever be about.
In the old USA you now have the well to do co-opting public education by abandoning commitments to equality and taking the best for themselves.
So now we have the schools legally re-segregating and the neocons have given their blessings. Back to the future (1953.)
"In an egalitarian society, the public would never abandon public education. That only 5% of our students are treated as "gifted" makes one wonder if this 5% is all public school will ever be about."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In a free society, people should be able to abandon public school if they want. It's called choice. Egalitarian society wont work because the kids who are gifted (regardless of race) would get the attention they need to grow even further. In your precious "egalitarian" society we would have no Einstiens, no Michael Jordans, no Bill Gates, no Ben Franklins...all because you're more worried about everyone being "equal". Well, we're not all equal. Some people have more ability than others.
Also, the 5% being treated as "gifted" deserve to be treated as such. They can move on to more challenging school programs and more attention instead of having to lag behind and be bored with the rest of the class.
I see nothing in the article that says the 5% only compromises whites. If a black kid tests high enough, than there is nothing that can exclude him or her from being in the gifted programs. It's just more of your liberal progressive anti-achievement hyperbole.
We're not all equal, that's why "egalitarian" is marxist bullshit. Get over it.
Yo, your favorite empire (usa) was formed under the principle that "all men are created equal." What sort of bullshit was that?
That was just hypocrisy by our founding fathers - your heroes. Get over it!
We might all be created equal, but our individual choices dictate how we'll fair in life. Not everyone strives to be the next Michael Jordon or Einstein. Stop trying to hold back and be jealous of the achievers. You have a lot to thank them for.
when the founding fathers used the term "all men" they were not referring to all people. there is no inconsistency here, as long as their definition is understood to be sufficiently narrow.
Chancellor Klein's plan to revamp gifted and talented programs is wrongheaded for a number of reasons having little to do with the predictive accuracy of the tests to be administered. First of all, the blunt and unwelcome truth of the matter is that the predicated selection mechanism, if applied scrupulously, will eliminate all but a token handful of black and latino youngsters from G&T programs. The reasons for this are obscure and debatable and touch many politically and racially sensitive nerves, but empirical evidence strongly backs the prediction. On the other hand, if criteria are not rigidly and objectively applied in order to augment the numbers of black and latino participants, many white and Asian parents will be indignant and furious at the hypocrisy of the system.
Furthermore, irrespective of racial issues, Klein's scheme flies in the face of political realities, notably the fact that the existence of G&T programs is the only thing that keeps middle class parents loyal to the idea of public education for their kids. A drastic drop in G&T slots means, inevitably, that a larger percentage of such parents will opt out of the system and resort to painfully expensive private schools instead. The political costs to public education are all too obvious. A much wiser move would be to broaden the criteria for G&T eligibility--accepting the top 25% , say--in order to anchor the middle class to the public school culture.
As an unabashed elitist, I can see the pedagogical value of a tiny program reserved for truly exceptional students, implementing a much more sophisticated and demanding curriculum than is customary for young students. But in the context of New York City, its actual demographics and its current problems, it's foolish to limit "G&T" to such an ambitious and restrictive program.
"A drastic drop in G&T slots means, inevitably, that a larger percentage of such parents will opt out of the system and resort to painfully expensive private schools instead."
=================================================
This would be a good thing, actually. Public schools are nothing but liberal brainwashing camps. They'll spend 6 hours a day teaching you how evil America is, and the cuisine of some 3 foot by ten foot country in Africa...but neglect to teach math and English basics. My kid isnt born yet and I'm already saving for the most expensive, challenging private school I can get my hands on.
Little far away from home, aren't we Mr. Georgia?
Am I supposed to be impressed? Hope not.
I send this message as a reply, because at least the author admits to elitism -- refreshing!
If one can stumble out of the stupor of seeing america as a land of equal opportunity, one sees clearly that america is, and always has been, a class-based society with these general categories:
1. The truly rich - they give us morals, politicians, judges, war and the mythology of equality and -- you know -- the Core Curriculum
2. The shrinking middle class - who believe-- hope -- they will someday be in category #1
3. Those who were shrunk out of the middle class by category #1
4. The poor - those who pay for #1, #2, and #3
Once you get this right, you will see that any attempt to establish a "G&T" or special or elite community will immediately be purchased (cheaply) by group #1 and used for their self-advancement.
Come on, guys! This is america!
Whenever standards are set, liberals come out of the woodwork and blame "the rich". I dont see anything in the article pertaining to class or money, but I suppose to empty-headed marxists it always boils down to that.
A hint for the irate parents: if you want your kid in the program, make sure they learn study habits that will get them into the top 5% to qualify. I realize that this means hard work...and I realize that not every kid will be capable of doing it (GASP!)...but I see no reason why the top 5% should have to lag behind with others still trying to grasp the basics.
Of course, I suppose suggesting that is somehow racist or elitist or something. *yawn*.
Well, now. To get into the top 5% you say?
What gets one there in america? It's skin color and money.
The top 5% are merely the window-dressing on discrimination, privelege and outrageous wealth vs. extreme poverty (america.)
The rich don't lag - they lead. Look at George Bush - your ideological daddy!
Oddly enough ,the article says nothing about money. It has to do with test scores. Even poor kids can test in the top 5%. Take your tinfoil hat off for a few seconds and re-read.
I'm glad you said "can test in the top 5%" Then, why don't they?
If you study a little american history, you will learn that public schools were very attractive to white people before 1954. Then what happened? Those "liberals" insisted on school desegregation.
Bye Bye (bad) public education in america. Hello all-white (good) private schools!
You gotta admit, that was quick!
Uh okay...but only 9% of American kids are even enrolled in Private Schools...many of them Asian and children from foreign countries...so what's your point again?
Post new comment