Washington Post education blogger Jay Mathews' post this morning was completely off the mark. With a title like "Why urban schools don't need gifted programs", I couldn't exactly stand by and say nothing. See his post and my reply (as username aec7c) here.
Please comment on his post! Make sure he knows he's dead wrong and gifted programs ARE necessary in all districts!
My mother-in-law taught 7th grade to help put her sons through college. When I later married the older son, we would be involved in dinner-table conversation where I remember her making the following remark: "The best students will always 'get it,' the low students will never 'get it,' so aim at the middle." She taught mostly in the middle of the 20 th century, in schools in Tennessee and Mississippi, I believe. Back then we still talked about "the three R's" and there was a set content that you either learned or you didn't. That can't possibly hold anymore. Students need to be prepared with the basic life skills to face an ever-changing (and rapidly, too) future. They need to learn how to learn, where the answers are if they don't have them, and how to work with others to see problems, work out solutions, and then use their creative imagination to innovate some more. Gifted education needs top priority, but perhaps because high-average people-energized extroverts go into politics, they don't see the need the same way. You can delete that sentence if you'd like!
ReplyDelete