This article appeared in TIME magazine in August of 2007 and it remains a relevant area of inquiry for us in 2009. When we talk about 'special education' issues, the students mentioned in this article fit the bill, but do not get included in a traditional sense. Read the article and post your thoughts.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1653653,00.html
Proactive Pathways for Engagement
20 hours ago
John Cloud's article "Are we Failing our Geniuses?" raises a key point; what to do with a genius? Cloud is right to claim that gifted children deserve just as much attention as special needs students. However he also states that there are not as many organs available to these children. We must ask ourselves why? Why is Annalisee a prisoner of her own genius? Some obvious and frightening answers emerge. For example, it is easier to observe and diagnose a student with special needs. Be it from appearance, speech patterns or physical inhibitions, a student with special needs can be found and given the necessary assistance needed to give them the best chance at an education. What to do with an extremely gifted child? Now the frightening part. The educator which comes across a gifted student must do all in their power to guide the student to all their potential. Could it be that some educators feel threatened by such a student and are reluctant to do more to aid them, or maybe they are simply skeptical of the situation and need more proof. It is the duty of the educator to recognize all types of students and aid them in their career path as best as possible. So if geniuses are neglected and special needs students are casted aside into special programs, and the rank and file are left to fill the hours of the day, we must seriously examine our educators and their motives for being teachers.
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed reading this article, as it presents a side of special needs that is rarely talked about. Really, the question that is posed; Is what do we do with our gifted children? I have to hand it to the Davidson Academy as they have tried to create a solution to this problem. I say try; because there are still many social issues attached with segregating children. How does the population learn to live amongst differences? But I guess the reality is how difficult it can be for the person who is different. I think the academy is great start but our education system/ governments need to revisit the current issue and build upon their successes.
ReplyDeleteThis article highlights the different problems faced by top young minds in America. Government kept on cutting funding from gifted program. Policy makers spend more money to bring low-achieving students to mere proficiency level.
ReplyDeleteThe best way to deal with these gifted minds is to recognize and accommodate their special need rather than be locked into an age based curriculum in their own community.
Davidson academy is a unique effort to nurture these powerful minds by providing them a personalized learning plan so that these top young minds will be appropriately challenged across all subject areas. This academy also addresses the importance of interpersonal and social skills which are the key point to get success in real world.
This was such an insightful article. Too often when I think of special education I think of children with special needs. The idea of what to do with the gifted student does seem ignored. I was shocked to read that gifted students drop out at the same rate as student’s struggling in school. No child left behind is good in theory, it is important that every child meet standard levels, but the government is funding considerably less to gifted children programs and this I find worrisome. Although the Davidson Academy of Nevada has offered a rare opportunity for children like Annalisee, like the article I can’t help wonder is the answer to segregate the brightest kids? The article discusses various studies which conclude that gifted children who are unchallenged become depressed socially awkward adults, whereas children who are placed in higher grades usually turn out fine. I kind of agree with this line of thinking, a special school for genius children may not be the best answer, since like the article suggests what happens when children are forced to interact with children with average intelligence? The bottom line is that more research needs to be done in this field and that the government needs to work with educators to find a solution to such problems. If that means allowing a child to skip three grades and enroll in college prep courses then so be it. Funding needs to be increased. In addition everyone should be careful as to what exactly children are learning at schools like the academy in Reno, gifted children need to be challenged; they need structure just as much as average children.
ReplyDeleteI feel that this article is an example of the way in which society is still passing judgement towards people that are not the norm. How can an education system, or society as a whole, claim that the "days of being biased" towards any sort of mental or physical difference, when we are in fact not that far beyond what used to be, although it is just represented in a different way. Instead of passing judgement against those that some "ignorant" people would say are "less" than the normal person, some people are now passing that same judgement against those that may be deemed "better" than the Norm. I find the dollar amounts presented in this article to be staggering in comparison to each other. "8 billion dollars/yr is spent on educating the mentally retarded, and no more than 800 thousand is spent on gifted children. I can understand that yes, there may be less gifted children, but that is a significant difference. Also pointed out in the article was that fact that some schools are against grade skipping. Why would a school system in which we are to be educating the children of the future, gifted children who could very well impact the future of our grim planet, be held back? Is that not suppressing a mind which is looking for greater challenges? And the one place children are supposed to feel safe and given the chance and opportunities to show what they have learnt is the same place that is going to hold them back? I feel this is going to be a never ending cycle of "people in high places" not wanting the "little people" to make it big...ever.
ReplyDeleteIn his articles about whether or not we are failing our geniuses, John Cloud scrutinizes the ways in which policies in america are polarized in special education and the inherent problems that have been rising out of this skewed perspective. I gather that it is up to this generation of teachers to stand up for equality across the board in special education funding.
ReplyDeleteThis bias could have started because of the definition of special education. The authos points out that special needs are those three standard deviations below the mean performance, but it does not stop here. Where most people have their ignorance is that special education is also mean to serve the population of students that lie 3 standard deviations above the mean in performance. WHAT ABOUT OUR GENIUSES?
One might think "Oh they're geniuses, they dont need extra attention, they could learn all nof it by themselves." Granted, in materials that they are most apt to they would probably be able to teach themselves, but what about if the students are not creative, is it right to funnel their genius in one direction? Or instead should we encourage our geniuses to be well rounded and teach them the fascinating things that can be learned through creativity.
I refer to a point the author makes in his article: " American Schools spend more thanb 8 billion dollars a year educating the mentally retarded. Spending on the gifted... [is] no more than $800 million. Thats one tenth.
Now you might say "Well there are more retarded children than gifted children. To that I say look at the statistics, students who fall 3 standard deviations above and below the mean are in the 95th percentile and 5th percentile respectively. This means that 5% of the population is included in those categories. This being a percent equivocally guarantees that the sizes of the populations in that upper and lower boundary are somewhat equal. If that is the case, amd there are equal number of students in each 5% then ahy does one group get ten times more funding?"
I think that is ludicrous!!!
This article offers an interesting insight into how any program design can have inherent flaws. In this case it seems that desire to incorporate the learning disabled into the mainstream may come at the cost of the rest of the populace.
ReplyDeleteThe notation of teaching to the lowest denominator is not new. This debate has been going on for years. What seems to be required is a model that can offer motivation and support for all levels of learning.
I liked the sports analogy of learning. There is opportunity to play on different levels of hockey teams and he is most comfortable playing with those of his ability. In fact, he would be frustrated and lose interest if he were in a group of more highly talented players. They would be frustrated with him as well.
This approach seems to gets the most potential out of the players while maintaining a positive learning environment.
As future teachers, this is the classroom that we are going to be entering very soon. We are going to see an array of students, each with different styles and levels of learning. This article touched upon the notion of "cooperative learning". Cooperative learning is a tool that i have seen implemented within the classroom.
ReplyDeleteThe no child left behind act is something that is hindering the education program. Teachers are teaching for the test. The school will receive funding if in fact they succeed. Within this article, Cloud states that the no child act hinders our gifted students. By increasing, the funding of the special needs the funding of the gifted as decreased. Cloud stated perfectly, I believe, we are squandering our nation’s best young minds. We must change this area. We must embrace all young minds in our classroom, challenging them the best we can.
Like everything else in life, moderation is the key.
ReplyDeleteCan a child skip a grade without any issues? Sure. There is that spread (12 months) in student's ages in any given grade depending on where their birthday falls. A skipped grade would at its maximum result in a 24 month age difference between a gifted student and their peers however more than likely a 12 month difference.
Can a child skip two grades? Why not? Even a two year acceleration would provide a maximum of 3 years and an average of 2 years difference between the accelerated child and their peers.
At this point my opinion diverges with the article. A third skipped grade puts the child up to 4 and on average 3 years behind their peers. It is quite probable that the person will at some point enter puberty while his/her peers are already physically adult, and certainly well on their way to emotional and social maturity. No matter what level of intelligence, it is a journey that should only be made when both the mind and body agree it is time.
The result of the study by Gros, at least as presented by the author of the article was obviously written as support to skipping. He indicated that of those accelerated children all had PhDs which may not be an 'accurate' measure of success. How many of the non accelerated group were MDs, MBAs, Presidents of massive corporations, wildly successful entrepreneurs with merely a bachelors degree or indeed only high school. A survey of Presidents of Fortune 500 companies showed there were far more captains of sports teams than there were academics so what is the definition of 'success'?
Additionally, the sample size and the number of 'depressed' individuals well compelling on first read is not likely statistically significant.
Finally the other side of the same coin of acceleration is failing or holding a child back. At least in Ontario, 'it is easier to fit a camel through the eye of the needle' than to hold a child back when they do not meet the criteria for promotion. The term 'social promotion' is used for this concept which allows underperforming students to move to the next grade with their peers to ensure social and emotional growth of that student. Obviously there is more of a stigma attached to 'failing' but regardless of the mechanism that causes the mismatch of physical social and emotional maturation of the students, the mismatch is still there. I believe they are the two sides of the same coin and separating them is not a simple matter.
One wonders if it goes on the same premise as antibiotics for ear aches. Over 90 percent of them resolve on their own within a week. In Europe they are not generally provided to patients for isolated cases in the absence of other pathologies. Why then do physician in North America write prescriptions for this problem as a first line of defence? It is because of the expectations of the parents that he/she will be provided the cure in the form of a prescription. In the event the physician says no it will resolve by itself, the parent will argue backing up the physician's appointment book or go to another physician to get their perceived needs met.
I wonder if the acceleration especially hyper acceleration (3 grades or more) is a parent driven decision acted on by the gate keepers of education.
There are many examples in nature of too little is bad and too much is bad, from the effect of calcium on blood clotting, to the explosion of a given population in an ecosystem, to the amount of rainfall in the Amazon basin. What makes one think acceleration/deceleration (again in the absence of other pathology) of learning should deviate from this trend?
An interesting article and something that I had not really considered. This article answers its own question in that it seems to be some proof that we are failing our geniuses. Students from around the globe, like Max from Australia, moved to Nevada so that they could attend this school for gifted students. Annalisee had to relocate from Texas. This goes to show that there are not enough institutions geared towards the gifted, seemingly worldwide.
ReplyDeleteOne concern I had was the fact that the Davidson Academy itself separates the gifted students from the rest of the world. These are students that already don't fit in and may be further marginalized by attending the academy. However, that is not to say they shouldn't go, I think it is a step in the right direction in the simple fact that it recognizes the needs of our gifted students. Finally, I think we should be considering the final outcome of the piece, and that is to allow students to skip ahead in their own communities at their own pace. Some further research into the benefits and consequences of skipping ahead would be interesting to see.
I personally feel that this particularly gifted school is assisting the students greatly in an academic perspective, but not in a social one. It is aiding them with the necessary education that they need in order to thrive and grow, yet in turn, being enrolled in that particular school is segregating them to only children of their intellectual ability. Going to this school may not give them a chance to interact with other children and people, people with different interests and abilities. I feel that you can learn a lot from others, and if all of these gifted individuals are constantly with one another it could give them a closed minded view on other aspects and alternative interests that they could enjoy.
ReplyDeleteWhat an interesting segment of special needs education that is clearly not being adequately addressed. The slashed funding across the board for gifted programs when compared to other special needs based education programs is astounding.
ReplyDeleteWhile the Davidson Academy seems to be a great atmosphere and a place where a great education is definitely received, I am left wondering if segregating students in this regard is in their best interest. Firstly, as the article describes, the students are often attending the school when their home and their family (or part of their family) are far away. I wonder what implications this has on a child who is in the pre-teen or early teenage years? Secondly, there is a segregation issue that must be addressed. Being constantly surrounded by other incredibly gifted children may stunt a child’s ability to be accepting and tolerant, as they have not been exposed to any diversity in terms of other people’s learning abilities. This may pose a problem upon entering the ‘real’ world. Difficulties may arise in personal and business relationships as the majority of their interaction throughout their schooling years has only been with geniuses.
The Davidson Academy in Nevada provided the right nurturing environment for gifted students where social interaction is just as important as academic knowledge. Given the fact that gifted students are capable of performing self-assessment, formative assessment and summative assessment during their autodidactic studies is truly remarkable; however, they still need assistance. Academically speaking, unlike the teachers’ job in mainstream educational system, here the teachers’ job is mainly to provide guided practice as a means of providing the assistance they need to acquire knowledge and develop skills. This is definitely a unique approach to address the needs of gifted students just as the approach is used by using IEP’s to help the needs of students at the other end of the academic spectrum.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I think it would be a fantastic opportunity to teach or at least observe the students in action at the Davidson Academy in Nevada. To become an effective teacher is a package deal where the teacher is a facilitator at many levels, and here the situation is unique in the sense that the lesson plan had to be cleverly crafted to try to meet the needs of the students. The best teachers in my opinion would continue to develop or modify their lesson plans to maximize the students’ potential.
This article touches on an important topic. As far as extremely gifted students who would possibly grade jump or attend special schools like the Davidson Academy, I do worry about their social growth. I agree with Dan when he shows concern about further marginalizing them. At my school (in the science department) when scheduling cuts have to be made they always go after the higher level elective courses, which is very frustrating. I feel this sends the wrong message to students. It is a direct result of the education constraints we face due to NCLB. What a day it will be when education is truly differentiated and meeting all learners needs is equally valued. Look at the financial statistic the article provided: 8 billion dollars towards the low end of the spectrum and 800 million toward the top. ??. This along with the drop out rates in each group being equal should definitely raise some red flags in the education world. As classroom teachers this is an issue we should follow closely and work toward correcting.
ReplyDeleteI think that the article “Are we failing our geniuses” poses a variety of questions and identifies with numerous problems with the educational system and how it is set up especially with regards to special education in the United States. I feel that when we think of special education we think of the students who struggle with school, socially and academically not the other side of the spectrum, those being students like Annalisse; individuals who excel at school. When looking at Bushes “No Child Left Behind” program it examines poses the risk of pumping students through the educational system that probably should not even pass, but what about the students who need to progress faster then the average student, does that mean we keep them back in a program “No child aloud to advance”? I understand the social problems of children like Annalisse progressing to fast, but there has to be a better answer then only allowing her to advance two grades ahead of her age bracket, or going to a school that perhaps many parents may not be able to afford, or for students who may not have as accommodating circumstances as her with regards to parents who are willing to ship their children off to school at such a young age. What should be taken from this article in my opinion is that there are a lot of problems in the education system and this is another one that often goes over looked. The problems that are in the education system are quite vast and cover students of all age, ability or lack their of. I think that there is a great analogy in this article that compares this situation to sports and how we do not hold professional athletes behind, but we push them forward with specialized training, why can we not do this with our bright young minds?
ReplyDelete