Jump to content

Menu

Should I Participate in a Testing Set-Up I Believe Is Unethical?


Tsuga
 Share

Recommended Posts

Background:

 

My kid works about two grade levels ahead in math (but it's still first grade so that's simple operations), and about .7 - 1 grade levels ahead in reading. I don't believe she's "highly gifted" but she is highly motivated and very intelligent. If I had to ballpark it, I'd give her an IQ of about 145 (mine and ex-husbands IQs, plus ten for the Flynn effect). Smart but not like, eerily intelligent. We were both in the 97-99th percentiles as children.

 

My school district begins gifted education in the second grade. The testing for that is parent and teacher motivated, i.e. there is no standardized test by which to nominate a child for gifted testing. The testing is advertised to 100% of parents through online newsletters and flyers. Later in the child's education, the child will go through standardized tests and might be nominated in that way. The school district has one of the top gifted education programs in the nation. It is very hard to be kicked out of the gifted program.

 

My belief about gifted education is that it should be "democratic", i.e. it should be extremely hard to increase your child's chances of entering the program through preparation, and it should also not begin until all children have had a good year or two of free public education to prepare, since we know kids even out by about third grade from the advantages of early training. I believe the way our school district has set it up, they increase the possibility of children getting in through a type I error (i.e. a child who takes the test every year in elementary school is more likely to get an accidental high score, than a child who never takes it; they might have the same scores on standardized tests). This type I error will favor involved parents who advocate for their children, and the limited number of places means that repeated test taking could edge out the bright but less prepared students, particularly in the younger grades.

 

My belief about parenting is that we shouldn't always ask our children to be martyrs for our beliefs. I believe in school uniforms but I don't send my daughter to public school in khakis, black shoes and a white polo shirt to make a point. I don't like sugar in her lunch but she still gets a little treat to eat when all the other kids are getting a little treat (even if it's a granola bar or a tiny piece of chocolate). But we should also set a good example, so I have made it clear to her that if she takes a punch in the nose and gets back up to face the bully and doesn't run away, I'll be more proud of her than if she hits the bully back. Brave and peaceful resistance and all that. Basically, we choose our battles.

 

Question

 

I'm agonizing over this. I really think the school district's set-up is unfair and will get a kid like mine in (possibly, on a good day) but not a kid who might be smarter, but with less prep. But at the same time, my opting out will not get that other child in. Instead, another child with prep, who is the same intelligence or slightly less intelligent than my child will get in. Maria Gonzales' parents are not going to send her in for testing and anyway she hasn't gotten English down that well yet. But she might be smarter. I went to school with such kids. I went to school with a boy whose father wouldn't let him take the test in third grade because they were undocumented and he didn't want to come to the attention of the testers (dad was a landscaper for a huge company in the 80s before things were as strict). :~( That boy was so smart, he actually was in the 99th percentile in his first six months of learning English. At the age of eight. No programs for him. I still remember his name and the injustice of it all (I am also Hispanic, but my family was on the other side of the border when the Mexican-American war ended so I really identified with that boy).

 

But I'm gonna be honest, I want my kid in the top schools in the nation so badly. I won't lie. The gifted program here is superb. It's world-class and it's free. You can even get the international baccalaureate.

 

UGH.

 

Your thoughts? What should I do?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what you are asking is should you opt out of the gifted program bc you don't agree with how the children are chosen?

 

Am I understanding that kids can get into the program in the early grades through teacher and parent recommendations and later through test scores?

 

I think ultimately only you can answer whether or not it is right for your child.

 

If your dd does have an IQ of 145 she is easily gifted and would not be put in the program on the basis of early enrichment. IMO she shouldn't be denied the gifted program bc there might be a child who isn't identified bc of their background.

 

Your system's procedure for identifying gifted children is actually quite open compared to some. Some places have no gifted program until 3rd. Some only ID in fourth, use standardized testing and then, after that, there is no chance of getting in at all. Some places have no gifted classes. Those procedures are much more open to what you are concerned about. I'm not sure how the boy you spoke of in your post would be missed in your child's school.

 

I was once part of a school with democratic placement. It ended up that all but 6 kids would go to the gifted class. I'm not sure that was helpful to anyone, really.

 

I also think that in a school the type you are describing, the non-gifted class would also be a good place to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would certainly not keep my kid out of the gifted program (unless I believed she did not truly qualify).  From your description, it sounds like there is plenty of opportunity for kids to get in now or later.  Don't assume that other kids' parents will not push for their kids just because they are demographically different from you.  Or that their teachers will not do the same, seeing a gifted kid being unchallenged in class.

 

If you kept your kid out, I think both you and she would resent it down the line.  A child with that high of an IQ deserves the gifted resources that the school is offering.

 

If you think reform is needed, make suggestions or get involved in some other way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Freesia (how do I give a shout-out on this forum?), thank you for your thoughtful answer. To clarify:

  • Opting out of testing in the first grade would guarantee no possibility of enrichment in second grade, yes.
  • However it would not be opting out of the entire program, as they re-test children with standardized tests every year. Obviously those children in enriched classrooms do better on those tests.
  • You are right that even "regular" classrooms in this school are awesome.
  • She's not "easily" in. She'd be easily in somewhere else. Not here. It's a very high-income, high-STEM-job population. My neighbor's daughter who was 1.5 grades ahead in math and 2 grades ahead in reading did not get in. I have heard it quoted that the school district cutoff (because of a high number of high performing children) for gifted education hovers around 155 and that does not surprise me.
It ended up that all but 6 kids would go to the gifted class.

By "democratic" I suppose I should have said "meritocratic", i.e. based on standardized, normalized tests after grade 2. Not on personal nomination. It should go by percentile. They expect to see two children out of every 100 in the gifted program. Democratic (meaning, no advantage can be given on the basis of economic or other background) would not increase that, because mathematically, 98th% is 98th%.

 

SKL, you make some good points about reform.

 

 

Don't assume that other kids' parents will not push for their kids just because they are demographically different from you.

 

I'm not assuming anything about a particular group. I just know that some people are not pushing for their kids, whatever their background. My own partner did not. He did no home enrichment, and no requested testing. Both of his kids are on the cusp but did not get in. I believe they both could have, but he believes in "letting a kid go their own way".

 

But also, if you saw who was in the gifted program here, you'd be amazed. There is not a single black or Hispanic child in the entire elementary school's gifted program. There are about 3 white kids per class. Every other child is of east Asian or south Asian descent.

 

I do not believe that Asians are genetically superior to white kids. It is a question of culture and expectations in the home that lead children to perform differently, particularly in the early years when kids spend less time in school and more time around mom.

 

They get in the program early. Then they have access to 6 hours a day, five days a week, 30 weeks a year more enrichment than the kids who weren't prepped. So they stay in, and black kids stay out.

 

Nobody wants to see this level of segregation, not at the school, not at home. But the difference is the effort the Asian families put in early on. And you see it everywhere: homework for Asian kids at sports practices, and the white kids are on iPads, and there are no black kids at all. :( I'd love to be race-blind here but I can't ignore what is right before my eyes. Even my partner, when I pointed this out to him was like, "Holy cow."

 

Sooo... while I hear what you're saying, I also think that there are socio-economic factors here that we can't ignore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have some good points. The IQ cut off is really, really high. There are plenty of bright kids in the regular classroom which is probably part of the reason that the classes are still quite enriched. I don't think not getting into the program will make any difference in your child's future. As you point out, she already has an enriched home life. If she is not bored in the regular class, it may not make much difference in her future at all.

 

And, yes, there is much more to school performance than innate ability. A school psych I know says that children from enriched homes often have inflated IQ scores at 7 and that it evens out. Kids whose parents have high expectations and who work with them at home will perform better. I don't think we are ever going to find a way to make it fair bc life isn't fair from the beginning for many children. This is why some school systems don't have gifted programs at all. And that isn't right for the highly and profoundly gifted kids who are just spinning their wheels in a regular classroom.

 

It's a huge social issue that you have brought up. And there isn't an easy answer. But, as I said before, your school seems more fair than many others. And I think your daughter will be fine either way (particularly bc you are so intentional about making decisions for her--that models great problem solving skills that she will benefit from wherever she is.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, to clarify, I would not push my kid to practice in order to do well on the gifted test, or anything of that nature.  I would, however, have her take the test that is offered for the screening.  If she got in, I'd be glad because she'd get challenged as she should.  If she did not, I would be glad that she had good opportunities in her classroom and would not be unreasonably pushed in a too-hard gifted program.

 

I would not concern myself about what other families do at home.  We all have different priorities.  Academic opportunities are not everything.  The same kids who are pushed to prep for tests they would not otherwise pass are missing other things.  This leaves opportunities for the other kids.

 

What you are seeing in your district, parents of all races are seeing.  They are making a choice whether to let their kids watch TV, play sports, or spend an extra hour every night on accelerated math.  They know it's going to impact their kids' chances at the gifted program.  I would assume they are OK with that.  If their kids are truly gifted, they will probably still do well on the tests.  If not, their kids will find their way in the world without having a gifted education.

 

When I was a kid, my parents were as hands-off on education as you could get.  Still, several of us tested gifted.  Hmm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The cutoff is high but that's what happens when you live in a school district full of engineers. It's a percentile issue.

 

 

If she is not bored in the regular class, it may not make much difference in her future at all.

 

Yet another thing to think about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By the way, I know black families who are very serious about education.  They send their kids to "good schools" and work with them at home.  It's not that hard to do if you want to do it.  But not everyone wants to do it, and that is OK.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SKL, I find that you often seem to read my posts in a very black-and-white way, but I'd ask that you consider reading these posts using the principle of charity. It should be clear that I'm describing a complex social phenomenon and that it's not black and white. It's not all-or-nothing, 100% of As always do x and 100% of Bs always do y and never the twain shall meet. The posts are long enough as it is, so writing a paragraph on every exception to a general social phenomenon would be tedious.

 

What you are seeing in your district, parents of all races are seeing.

 

But they see it too late to take advantage. They only see how much work parents in another culture put into it afterwards. I know one white family that does the enrichment we do. The others all do play-based stuff until the age of six. Fair enough, but then they are amazed at what the other parents are doing. And they do feel they've been cheated out of opportunities to get into enrichment that early because they didn't know it started in the first grade (Asian parents, who hang out with other Asian parents, DO know, because those parents have kids in the program) and they also didn't realize there was so much subject-specific content on the test.

 

So they see the pattern, but only after it's too late to get your "on-the-borderline" kid in, because by that time, the differences are being erased.

 

But the on-the-borderline kids who were prepped, have gotten the enrichment your kid hasn't. And they stay in.

 

Yes, I know some black families who work hard at academics, but it doesn't change the fact that in a school of 700 kids, with 300 in the gifted program (consolidated from a large district, so they serve local kids as well as gifted kids from across the city), there is not a single black child from the district in the program. I mean what can I say to that? They just aren't in the program. I have seen the pictures of the kids in the yearbook. They aren't there. This is not me judging black families. It's me saying, "Holy cow, there is not ONE black or Hispanic child in this program. Whoa."

 

 

When I was a kid, my parents were as hands-off on education as you could get.  Still, several of us tested gifted.  Hmm.

 

Yes, so did I. But then again, when I tested:

 

  • It was after three years of free public school (K-2).
  • Nobody else was prepping the children.

This is the whole point of my post. Look at the big picture. I'm saying that kids like you would not test in, in this district, because early testing and widespread prepping crowd out the children who are not prepped, and this exacerbates preparatory advantage that led to the discrimination in the first place. You wouldn't make it. Were you doing multiple-digit multiplication at the beginning of first grade? If someone asked you to re-tell the plot of a book, could you do it? Were you deeply familiar with analogies and logic tests so that you could take a worksheet and do 10 in a minute?

 

Because our gifted classes are populated with children who can do that, not because of innate ability or drive, but because of preparation. Preparation that is only significant in the first year or two, and which not all children have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 And they do feel they've been cheated out of opportunities to get into enrichment that early because they didn't know it started in the first grade (Asian parents, who hang out with other Asian parents, DO know, because those parents have kids in the program) and they also didn't realize there was so much subject-specific content on the test.

......

Were you doing multiple-digit multiplication at the beginning of first grade? If someone asked you to re-tell the plot of a book, could you do it? Were you deeply familiar with analogies and logic tests so that you could take a worksheet and do 10 in a minute?

Honestly, the fault is in the screening test. 

In a way, it is like the SAT or ACT.  You can't stop parents from prepping their kids.  I read the article in NY times about the prep to get their kids into the gifted program and the "anxious" parents all prep their kids. 

This is the article I read "Schools Ask: Gifted or Just Well-Prepared?"

 

For the tasks you gave as examples, there are kids who can do it without prep. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some gifted people aren't good students at all and would wither in a gifted class.  I'm not even sure they always get it right with gifted classes.  A lot of times it seems that they just pile on more work rather than just change the type of work. 

:iagree:

even if they change the type of work, there are not enough mentors around for the gifted kids.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Binip, I was just trying to be helpful.  Never mind.  You have your opinion and you need to make your decision.

 

It is not helpful to take the worst, most black-and-white reading of a text and then point out how there are exceptions to every rule. I realize that you think you are pointing out new facts to me that I haven't considered, but when talking about averages that does not automatically exclude the ends of the bell curve or exceptions to the rule. It is just a general trend.

 

Re: IQ: There is an IQ portion (logic), but they have to be in the top 2% of all three portions (math, reading, logic).

 

 

For the tasks you gave as examples, there are kids who can do it without prep.

 

Yes, but the number is vanishingly small. The program is supposed to accommodate about 2% of the school district's population.

 

I mean, maybe the kids could figure it out, but the test is timed, so it would take them far too long. If I were that age, I would have been able to figure out two-digit multiplication, but since it would have been the first time I'd seen the problem, I would have taken a good five minutes.

 

Five minutes to unlock the code of double-digit multiplication at the age of six or seven is awesome.

 

But it wouldn't pass you on this test. You'd have to know it ahead of time in order to get in the top 1-2%. The test counts on zero prep. But people know it requires prep, and the payoff for this prep is HUGE. World class education for five years for free.

 

In this case, prep is almost cheating.

 

Do you cheat or not, knowing that everyone else is cheating?

 

I've done the prep believing that there would be a standardized test to determine whether she was achieving. I did it so she would feel comfortable at school and be challenged. But now that I know that I'm the sole nominator, it becomes a test-prep situation, and every worksheet I give her is me knowingly prepping her for an exam that you aren't supposed to prep for.

 

 

Honestly, the fault is in the screening test.

 

Yes. That is my problem. The screening test is unethical under these circumstances.

 

 

I wouldn't overthink this.  You aren't torturing small animals and making little kids mine diamonds.

 

Haha, that is a problem I have in general. Not owning a diamond mine run with slave labor, but overthinking things. :~)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have read the whole thread and could give a lengthy answer, but instead I'm going to respond simply to the question you posed in the title: "Should I Participate in a Testing Set-Up I Believe Is Unethical?"

 

My answer to that is "no". Do I personally believe the testing you described is unethical? No. But it shouldn't matter what others think of the test. If YOU believe a situation is unethical then my personal opinion is that you should not participate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I see it (and others might disagree) your first job as a parent is to look out for your child's own welfare and opportunities.  Regarding that responsibility I would suggest you should do what you feel is reasonable for the advancement of your child.  Allow her the opportunity, if she qualifies, and if a bit of advocating and prep on your part helps, then so be it.

 

Then look about for what you can do to address the problems you have identified.  Certainly speak up about the inequalities in opportunity you see if you are inclined, but be prepared with suggestions on how to address them.  Complaining about a problem you see with no suggestion on approach to address the problem isn't enough.  Also be aware -- if you speak up you will, in effect, be volunteering yourself for whatever work is identified to be done regarding the concern(s) you mention.

 

It's a tough call, and one that only you can make.  Good luck.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally believe that every parent should provide the best opportunity available for their child. What you see the Indians and Asians doing is not unethical - it is in their culture to revere and value academics/education and to start early and to have great faith in their child's abilities rather than worry that they may not be able to handle early academic rigor. They will do what you call "prepping" irrespective of whether the schools have a gifted program or not.

 

But to your original question - if you don't like it, stay out of it. By that I mean, stay away from what you feel is unethical because it might not make you happy.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is not helpful to take the worst, most black-and-white reading of a text and then point out how there are exceptions to every rule. I realize that you think you are pointing out new facts to me that I haven't considered, but when talking about averages that does not automatically exclude the ends of the bell curve or exceptions to the rule. It is just a general trend.

 

Re: IQ: There is an IQ portion (logic), but they have to be in the top 2% of all three portions (math, reading, logic).

 

I wasn't intending it at all as you read it.  Which is exactly what you are saying to me.  Apparently we do not understand each other very well.

 

I was trying to reassure you that it would not be unfair for you to let your daughter take that test.  In fact, I was saying what *I* would do and why.  It was just an opinion, you can take it or leave it.  I still can't figure out what I said that you took as uncharitable toward you.  If you are going to be offended every time I state something that you already know, you will be offended a lot, since I cannot read your mind.

 

Honestly, I'm having trouble with a lot of what you wrote.  For one thing, I doubt that the top 2% of students in any US school district can do double digit multiplication at the beginning of 1st grade.  But that aside, I'm not understanding your moral dilemma.  Personally I don't believe in prepping for any standardized test, ever, except at the professional level.  However, I do realize it is often done nowadays.  You knew there was this test coming up and you were consciously prepping your child for it.  But you thought there was going to be some other test to screen for it.  Do you believe your daughter would or would not have passed the screening test?  Do you believe the demographics of those who passed the screening test AND the eligibility test would have been more diverse than those who will pass the eligibility test?  Do you believe your daughter is gifted enough to belong in the gifted program?  Will it benefit her as compared to being in the regular classroom?  What would you have done differently if you understood the exact qualification procedure from day one?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, not sure I really understand the facts here, but isn't it actually more fair if the parents of *every* child are allowed to opt into the gifted screening test?  Requiring an achievement test in order to be allowed to take the gifted test would actually be more detrimental to kids who do not have what we consider "rich" educational experiences prior to school entry.  Or did I misunderstand again?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And one more thing (for now): if you prevent your daughter from taking a slot she would have gotten, what type of child do you think would get that slot?  A child who was prepped for the test, or a child who was not prepped?  In other words, does your decision to opt out help the "disadvantaged" families in any way?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In this case, prep is almost cheating.

 

Not necessarily.  I suggest you talk to the school officials about whether preparing for this test is considered cheating or not.  If they say it is, then ask how they control for it, given that many families do exactly that.

 

It could be that they are willing to take the students who get in because of preparation simply because of that preparation -- students and parents willing to invest time and effort into such preparation are the type to continue to invest time and effort into the more challenging studies.  Many who might test in on raw talent alone might not be willing to put in such effort.

 

My point is, you as a parent cannot control what other families do or don't do.  You can talk to the officials, and talk to other parents to see if others also share your concerns.  You can work to raise awareness, identify specific solutions, and drive change.  Find new paths to the water, and let the horses decide for themselves if they want to drink.

 

In the meantime, don't lose sight of your own child's case.  Child first, social and school reform second.  But that's just my own prioritization.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sometimes I think they should just teach classes at their supposed gifted level to everyone and offer extra help to those who can't keep up.

 

:iagree:

It would certainly be preferable to dragging the entire class down to the lowest common denominator simply because the teacher is too overloaded to do anything else.

 

That came out rather pessimistic, but that's exactly what I've seen happen all to often in the public schools here. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:iagree:

It would certainly be preferable to dragging the entire class down to the lowest common denominator simply because the teacher is too overloaded to do anything else.

 

That came out rather pessimistic, but that's exactly what I've seen happen all to often in the public schools here. 

 

Well, not if it's double-digit multiplication at the beginning of 1st grade!  :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, not if it's double-digit multiplication at the beginning of 1st grade!  :p

 

True; that does seem a bit excessive.

 

However, I wonder about that -- was it, perhaps, included as a far-reach type of question?  Just to see if any of the youngsters taking the test can reach that far?  I do know that some of the tests I've taken in the past were of the type that they kept giving more and more advanced levels until you no longer could do much, if anything at all.  They wanted to know where the student's limits were.  In 9th grade one gal was giving me 12th-grade tests and telling my parents she wished she had college-level tests to give me.

 

When switching over to homeschooling I decided to switch from Saxon Math (used in the kids' school) to Teaching Textbooks.  Due to the change not only in curriculum, but in presentation method (computer-based because of my visually inclined kids) I decided to give my kids the placement tests.  DD9, even though she was in 3rd grade at the time, was effectively acing the placement tests.  I had her take 4th, 5th, 6th -- she was on the 7th grade placement test before we found a problem she didn't know how to do and couldn't puzzle out on her own (I did not time the tests, and let them work at their own paces).  She is now doing 6th grade math along with DD12, simply because I want her to have some practice doing the math she figured out on her own, and I didn't want hard concepts right out of the box when we were still getting used to the new system.  This math wizardry took us by surprise -- it certainly was not apparent in her brick & mortar school days, because she happily worked at the pace of the rest of the class and was well-behaved.  No one thought to challenge her further.  They just enjoyed her high scores on standardized tests, and called it good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

World class education for five years for free.

 

What program is this and why haven't I heard of it? :D

 

In my experience, kids with IQs as high as 155 and more are usually beset by asynchrony issues that make tests focused on computation frustrating to say the least.

 

ETA: I wouldn't do it if I believed it was unethical, against my principles, and/or rang huge red-colored, red-flag decorated bells in my head.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought she was a reluctant, brand-new reader who's just starting to practice subtraction facts and multiplying by 10s afterschool. Honestly she sounds bright, but not "OMG get this kid into an environment to suit her special needs before she crashes and burns on her school experience", you know? I don't mean that to be snide, I think the same of my son. He is bright but, now that I've calmed down about having him in school at all, I don't think it's damaging for him to be in a regular classroom, and in many ways I'd rather have him there with more diverse peers than pulled out with kids that are all "extra-clever". In particular, I don't think he has special needs that require the services of a special education (GAT specialist). He functions just fine in the classroom. (This is all hypothetical in our case, I don't think we have any GAT services or if we do, it's probably pull-outs starting in 3rd...there aren't any dedicated gifted classrooms in our district.)

 

I hear you on the ethical quandaries. I try to gauge my educational choices by what choices are available to my hard-working blue-collar friends that are the children of immigrants. If my kids deserve great teachers and great content, etc., then those families deserve the same, so I try all the harder to work with the school to make sure there can be good opportunities for everybody.

 

Yet, at the end of the day, we do have to do what's best for our own kids. If there were an opt-in gifted test, regardless of whether I feared that certain demographics would self-select out of it, I'd go for it. But I wouldn't go all high-stakes pressure on it and cram. I'd figure we were in or we weren't, and regardless, my kid has the benefit of an involved parent. He's gonna be OK. I think your daughter will, too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Every child, including your daughter, deserves to have an appropriate placement in school. Denying her the opportunity for a good academic fit doesn't do anything to fix what is wrong with this system.

 

I've seen enough kids get surprising results (higher and lower) on IQ testing that I would not assume a child's result can be predicted just based on the parents' results and a general look at how the child stacks up on developmental milestones. Giftedness does not always look the same from one child to the next.

 

ETA: Just out of curiosity what is the test being used?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The big multi-quote answer post...

 

My answer to that is "no". Do I personally believe the testing you described is unethical? No. But it shouldn't matter what others think of the test. If YOU believe a situation is unethical then my personal opinion is that you should not participate.

 

Thank you for your honesty.

 

Allow her the opportunity, if she qualifies, and if a bit of advocating and prep on your part helps, then so be it.

 

Then look about for what you can do to address the problems you have identified.  Certainly speak up about the inequalities in opportunity you see if you are inclined, but be prepared with suggestions on how to address them.  Complaining about a problem you see with no suggestion on approach to address the problem isn't enough.  Also be aware -- if you speak up you will, in effect, be volunteering yourself for whatever work is identified to be done regarding the concern(s) you mention.

 

I'm not so sure about further prep but I agree completely that I need to be prepared with a solution and not just problems, and that the solution will probably require a significant time investment on my part. Thanks.

 

What you see the Indians and Asians doing is not unethical - it is in their culture to revere and value academics/education and to start early and to have great faith in their child's abilities rather than worry that they may not be able to handle early academic rigor. They will do what you call "prepping" irrespective of whether the schools have a gifted program or not.

 

Yeah, I don't think that people who haven't thought the problem through are doing something unethical.

 

Even preppers are just thinking, "How can it be unethical to do what everyone is doing? Fair is fair. Anyone can prep." But from my perspective, being in between cultural groups, and working in the social sector, I can see how this is a huge cultural bias and how it is created drop by drop, child by child, and how networks and cultural know-how play into what ends up being a deeply stacked test, which flows into a deeply stacked system and that's tragic.

 

Regarding the second part of your question, people prepare specifically for the test--to the point that before you take the test (this is how my neighbor found out) they went on and on about how prepping hurts the student, hurts the program, and how you can be banned from the program if caught. I don't think people would be working so hard on certain skills, like multiplication, if there weren't such a big payoff. People don't do that. They'd be better of with mom taking a second job and sending the kid to private school. But this payoff is bigger, because the school is better.

 

 You knew there was this test coming up and you were consciously prepping your child for it. 

 

No, I didn't know it was coming up, hence my angst.

 

I thought they didn't test until the end of second grade, and I also thought they only had standardized tests and from those children were selected for gifted testing (like at our old district). So basically I thought I was giving her a generic head start, something that would help her take everything the school could do, and really use it to her advantage, and then they'd see if she was exceptional. Not that I was setting her up to crowd out a child with natural talent but less prep.

 

Now I know it will be her preparation against more preparation and less preparation, but that the public school education will have little to do with it. Totally different ballgame.

 

Again, not sure I really understand the facts here, but isn't it actually more fair if the parents of *every* child are allowed to opt into the gifted screening test?  Requiring an achievement test in order to be allowed to take the gifted test would actually be more detrimental to kids who do not have what we consider "rich" educational experiences prior to school entry.  Or did I misunderstand again?

 

In theory, yes, it is more fair if everyone takes the test.

 

But that is not what happens until third grade, which is two years after some kids have been in the gifted program, and the state tests kick in.

 

As a matter of fact, certain parents test and re-test (again, thanks, neighbors and sister-in-law!). Introducing parent choice to the testing creates a bias towards those who will take the test multiple times, because there is always the chance of a fluke. They don't take the average over the tests, so someone who takes the test five times has a five time greater chance to get in "accidentally". A very small number of parents do this, but that still biases the program.

 

Since we know that many "prep" advantages are seriously reduced by about third grade, the most fair system would be an achievement test administered around that time. Then, parent prep advantage is reduced, and parent-led testing bias is reduced.

 

 

Not necessarily.  I suggest you talk to the school officials about whether preparing for this test is considered cheating or not.  If they say it is, then ask how they control for it, given that many families do exactly that.

 

It could be that they are willing to take the students who get in because of preparation simply because of that preparation -- students and parents willing to invest time and effort into such preparation are the type to continue to invest time and effort into the more challenging studies.  Many who might test in on raw talent alone might not be willing to put in such effort.

 

They explicitly state you aren't supposed to "prep". However, because they use a non-IQ test, this is unrealistic. That would mean no enrichment at home at all. So. Many. Issues. With. These. Tests.

 

Well, not if it's double-digit multiplication at the beginning of 1st grade!  :p

 

True; that does seem a bit excessive.

 

However, I wonder about that -- was it, perhaps, included as a far-reach type of question? 

 

After I found out about the test, I asked my neighbor about it, and she said her own daughter had been tested, and that she thought it was a really regrettable system, though she was very impressed by the kids who made it. She said that her daughter was an "almost made it" but got knocked down for not knowing double-digit multiplication. I was like, whoa. She has the test results and I guess you'll just have to trust me that it's highly unlikely she would be lying about this, given her character.

 

What program is this and why haven't I heard of it? :D

 

In my experience, kids with IQs as high as 155 and more are usually beset by asynchrony issues that make tests focused on computation frustrating to say the least.

 

ETA: I wouldn't do it if I believed it was unethical, against my principles, and/or rang huge red-colored, red-flag decorated bells in my head.

 

This is the gifted program in a very affluent, very well-funded, very liberal, very well-endowed, chock-full-of-engineers (mechanical, software, and biotech) zip code.

 

Math computation is only part of the test. There's also reading comprehension, vocabulary, and logic.

 

And a child with asynchronous learning issues would have trouble. You have to be accelerated in both math and English to pass. Yep.

 

I thought she was a reluctant, brand-new reader who's just starting to practice subtraction facts and multiplying by 10s afterschool. Honestly she sounds bright, but not "OMG get this kid into an environment to suit her special needs before she crashes and burns on her school experience", you know? I don't mean that to be snide, I think the same of my son. He is bright but, now that I've calmed down about having him in school at all, I don't think it's damaging for him to be in a regular classroom, and in many ways I'd rather have him there with more diverse peers than pulled out with kids that are all "extra-clever".

 

I completely agree with your assessment. It's not snide, it's frank. She's not brand-new--she's been reading for about a year BUT she has recently become a fluent reader, so just started reading chapter books. Right now she reads Rainbow Magic books, which are supposedly kindergarten interest, fourth grade level reading, but they seem to me more like second grade. She has done addition and subtraction for two years, struggling, but is doing the drills after school now that it's clicked for her.

 

To be honest, I don't give a full picture of my kid everywhere because in some contexts, what we went through is more relevant to the question than what we are going through now, you know. Also in some cases it sounds more like bragging than encouragement. In this thread it is relevant that she can do simple multiplication and got to reading chapter books in two months. In other threads, such as those when I discuss how she had no interest in doing something challenging for two entire years, it is not relevant to the question so why bring it up?

 

FWIW even if she passes she doesn't have to go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have read the whole thread and could give a lengthy answer, but instead I'm going to respond simply to the question you posed in the title: "Should I Participate in a Testing Set-Up I Believe Is Unethical?"

 

My answer to that is "no". Do I personally believe the testing you described is unethical? No. But it shouldn't matter what others think of the test. If YOU believe a situation is unethical then my personal opinion is that you should not participate.

 

I agree.  I don't think it's unethical, but if YOU think it's unethical then don't participate.

 

When I was in the 1st grade they did gifted testing.  Teachers and parents recommended students to take an IQ test.  The top 30 students (out of 1200 1st graders) got a slot in the self-enclosed gifted class.  There were no services at all for the other 1170 students.  My babysitter bragged to my mom that her daughter had been recommended to take the test, so my mother (lower-class, uneducated, and normally neglectful & clueless) requested that I be tested as well.  My babysitter's daughter and I were both in that magical group of 30 . . . then something unexpected happened.  Babysitter and her husband decided that they believed the setup of the gifted program was unethical and wrong.  They didn't want their daughter in an elite, selective program.  They didn't want her bussed away from her local (lower-class) elementary school to go to school with richer, privileged kids.  They didn't want her to be so focused on a career instead of motherhood.  I went into the program and she didn't.  They moved the following year, so that was that.  Many years later, I arrived at college as a freshman a few days early to attend some special seminars for students entering the Honors program.  As I was walking out of the first seminar I ran into . . . babysitter's daughter!  I did a double take before stopping her to reintroduce myself.  Here we were attending the same college (both on academic scholarship). 

 

Honestly, I needed that gifted program.  I was one of the lower-class kids from the wrong side of the tracks and I didn't have a lot of family support.  It was truly life changing for me.  Babysitter's daughter was going to be fine wherever she went to school.  Her parents were college educated and very involved.  They made the choice that jived with their social beliefs, and that was probably the right choice for them so that they could be true to their principles.

 . . . But . . .

Their choice didn't change the gifted program.  It didn't allow a greater percentage of lower class or minority students into the program.  It didn't help the large number of students who were gifted, but not in that top 2.5% to receive a challenging education.  Maybe it made them feel better, but it didn't do anything to help me or anybody else from the wrong side of the tracks.

 

If I were you I would let my child be tested and I would be darn sure that every parent I knew (especially those who are minority or lower-class) understood that they could nominate their child for testing.  I would be sure they knew how to nominate their child for testing.  If there was a way to prep or prepare, then I would be sure to clue them into that as well.  If people don't know, then tell them.  As a Hispanic parent you are uniquely positioned to share information with other Hispanic parents.  Once your child is in the program then you have a wonderful opportunity to change it for the better from the inside.  As a program parent you are entitled to say, "I'm concerned that my child is the only Hispanic child in this program.  Why is that?  Is this a problem in other communities?  What could we do to identify more Hispanic children with high potential?"  Get in there and be the force for change.  Holding your child out will not help those in your community.  Speaking up for them will.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you very much for sharing your story and thoughts, MinivanMom. I will really think about them.

 

 

I've seen enough kids get surprising results (higher and lower) on IQ testing that I would not assume a child's result can be predicted just based on the parents' results and a general look at how the child stacks up on developmental milestones. Giftedness does not always look the same from one child to the next.

 

ETA: Just out of curiosity what is the test being used?

 

It is the COGAT and two subject tests. I don't know what they are.

 

Re: results: I can't predict my child's results. What I can predict is that she is not a definite "in" but that she has a chance at it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Sometimes I think they should just teach classes at their supposed gifted level to everyone and offer extra help to those who can't keep up.

 

By the way, I completely agree with this, and our school district does have one such program. It's a lottery school and it's totally amazing. But it's middle school and up.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Binip, I think my personal way around this quandary would be:

 

1) Test the child, but without doing test-specific prep. Continue to enrich. If she makes it, think about your decision then. But if she makes it without prep, she probably should be there.

 

2) Especially if she does make it in, work hard to make sure that all parents are aware of the multiple opportunities for testing. I assume it doesn't cost anything?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I completely agree with your assessment. It's not snide, it's frank. She's not brand-new--she's been reading for about a year BUT she has recently become a fluent reader, so just started reading chapter books. Right now she reads Rainbow Magic books, which are supposedly kindergarten interest, fourth grade level reading, but they seem to me more like second grade. She has done addition and subtraction for two years, struggling, but is doing the drills after school now that it's clicked for her.

 

To be honest, I don't give a full picture of my kid everywhere because in some contexts, what we went through is more relevant to the question than what we are going through now, you know. Also in some cases it sounds more like bragging than encouragement. In this thread it is relevant that she can do simple multiplication and got to reading chapter books in two months. In other threads, such as those when I discuss how she had no interest in doing something challenging for two entire years, it is not relevant to the question so why bring it up?

 

FWIW even if she passes she doesn't have to go.

 

She sounds almost exactly like my son, honestly. We started practicing reading, on his request, when he was just shy of 5. He picked up blending easily, we did Progressive Phonics books and he read the "red words" without problems. But actual, fluent reading just kind of popped up this May. Let's see...my May 21st journal entry from this year (so 6 years 7 months) says "He's reading now...picking up books and asking for help with only one word in 20." My July 13th entry is about how he plowed through his first chapter book, a Magic Treehouse, in one sitting. :) He now reads on about a 3rd-4th grade level, we're going to work through Charlotte's Web together this week.

 

He's been adding fluently about the same amount of time, but a couple of months ago he seemed frustrated about subtraction so we worked on it and now it's pretty fluent. And he's gotten really good at skip-counting, to where he asked me the other night how many seconds are in 40 minutes, and I explained how to get the answer, and he did the heavy lifting himself. He also did some exercises on division by equal groups, and with just a bit of trial and error got answers like 36/6 correct. It's fun stuff to see them making connections!

 

A few things, though, make me hesitate to assume that my son is gifted or even high IQ. One is the reports of profoundly gifted kids' parents here. My kids are NOT on that level! Another is our pediatrician who said, when my son was an infant, that early verbal skill is the best predictor of high IQ. My son was on the late end for talking, and I guess I internalized the pediatrician's comment because I've pretty much scrubbed him mentally from Team Gifted. ;) Another factor is my daughter. She is crazily bright. At 4.5 she's reading fluently at a ~2nd grade level, adding and subtracting with great number sense, etc. Crazy kid just listened to an audiobook version of Robinson Crusoe today, and reported back on the content with great comprehension. *She* might be gifted, we'll have to see how she continues to progress. Jury's definitely still out on my son. If we had a chance to be tracked into a gifted program, I would not be attached to getting him in. I might think differently about her.

 

Educational choice is so overwhelming and complicated! How could you *not* want the very best for your kids, right?!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Feeling a little fired up about this, I went and dug out all of my old class pictures.  Looking at the 2nd grade photo was surprising.  When I think back on that self-enclosed gifted class I remember it as being very white and very upper-class.  Many of the kids had parents who were doctors, dentists, lawyers, etc.  In my memory it doesn't reflect the makeup of the school children in the California town where I grew up (approx. 50% white, 30% Hispanic, 15% Asian - primarily Hmong refugees -, 5% black).  I think my memory plays tricks on me, because this was the breakdown:

 

30 students

18 boys/12 girls

22 white/6 Hispanic (all Mexican-American)/2 Asian (1 Chinese-American & 1 Hmong refugee)/0 African-American

8 w/professional parents who were very involved

9 w/college educated parents who were involved

5 w/non-college educated parents who were involved

4 w/stable family situations, but the parents weren't involved (there were language & cultural barriers in all 4 families)

4 w/a crazy home situation that could only be described as unstable, violent, or highly dysfunctional

 

Yes, I feel qualified to comment on the educational background and family stability of all my former classmates.  Most of us were together in that self-enclosed gifted program from 2nd-8th grade, so I knew everyone very, very well.  Boys were overrepresented.  White children were overrepresented.  Children with professional or college-educated parents were overrepresented.  Lower-class children and minorities were underrepresented.  Our town tested again in 3rd and 5th grades and added an additional 30 students each time, so there were 90 students placed in self-enclosed gifted by 6th grade.  My 6th grade class had this breakdown:

 

28 students

16 boys/12 girls

20 white/2 Hispanic/5 Asian (2 Chinese-American, 1 Japanese-American, & 2 Hmong refugees)/1 African-American

 

About half of these children had been in my original 2nd grade class.  There appear to be fewer Hispanic children, but really most of the Hispanic children were in the self-enclosed gifted class at one of the other Junior High schools due to demographic patterns.  There were still more boys than girls, and white children were still overrepresented.  Upper-class children were also overrepresented.

 

Yet . . . there were minority children, lower-class children, and at-risk children represented within these groups.  It wasn't a perfect system, but the gifted program was helping gifted children . . . and some of those gifted children were minorities or children from lower-class backgrounds.  It didn't reach everyone, but it helped me and it helped others.  I'm not sure there is a perfect way to level the playing field for disadvantaged children.  I don't think there's a perfect way to make entry to gifted programs fair for disadvantaged children.  I think it helps to emphasize IQ over achievement.  I think it helps to have multiple entry points to a gifted program.  It will never be perfect, but I don't think that means we give up.  These programs help a lot of children.  If a few privileged kids get the perks too, because their parents knew how to work the system then I consider that a small price to pay.  Keeping my child out of the program as a matter principle, on the other hand, helps nobody and may actually hurt my child.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since IQ is inherited and IQ tends to predict career success, it should be expected that children of well-off parents are "overrepresented" in gifted classes regardless of how they are screened.  Maybe there is some bias in there but I would not expect it to be an exact mirror of the wider community - at least not from the perspective of economic strata.

 

In addition to genetics, IQ is also influenced by health factors such as the mother's health during pregnancy, no lead poisoning or FASD, good nutrition, good sleep, and general stability (lack of excess, chronic stress).  These factors will also tend to skew IQs among economic strata.

 

I do agree there are probably high-IQ minority kids who are not getting into gifted programs.  I agree with the PP who suggested getting the word out to all communities that this test is available to all kids and there is no downside to taking it (I assume).  For that matter, I wonder why they don't just give everyone the test in the first place.  Or make people opt out instead of opting in.

 

I think it makes sense to have the test include IQ and math and reading ability.  After all, the program is for kids who are going to be highly teachable, and not all brilliant kids are very teachable in a full-time accelerated group setting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think your responsibility is to your daughter and her education.

 

I don't think you can or should try to rectify the gifted program's admission standards. On one level, it's just none of your business what other families decide to do with their kids' education. You know that the gifted program will benefit your child, because you know your child. You are not the boss of those other kids and their futures.

 

In short, life's not fair and reality sucks and choices have consequences, and I think you should just submit your daughter to the program without making a grandiose gesture that will serve no one well, least of all your own child, and that will almost certainly fail to improve outcomes for any other child.

 

If you have concerns about gifted admissions standards in your district, send a strongly worded fax and leave it at that. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

I personally believe that every parent should provide the best opportunity available for their child. What you see the Indians and Asians doing is not unethical - it is in their culture to revere and value academics/education and to start early and to have great faith in their child's abilities rather than worry that they may not be able to handle early academic rigor. They will do what you call "prepping" irrespective of whether the schools have a gifted program or not.

 

But to your original question - if you don't like it, stay out of it. By that I mean, stay away from what you feel is unethical because it might not make you happy.

 

THIS. Yes!

 

In my humble, and perhaps weird, opinion, families that emphasize early-childhood education are NOT unethical or immoral or even manipulative "prepping" or cheating or hothousing or helicopter parenting or otherwise perpetrating developmentally damaging seatwork/flashcard/soul-crushing child abuse. 

 

What I see in these families are simply beliefs that [a] young children are capable of much more learning than mainstream American society believes or cares is possible, and  that academic prowess is as valuable or more valuable than other personal characteristics that can be fostered in early childhood such as athleticism, artistic creativity, pop-culture awareness, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

A few things, though, make me hesitate to assume that my son is gifted or even high IQ. One is the reports of profoundly gifted kids' parents here.

 

 

 

 

There is no doubt in my mind that my daughter is not profoundly gifted. Or at least, she's not profoundly gifted in academics. I assume by profoundly gifted you mean IQ of 160+ and self-taught reading at about the age of two, that type of thing?

 

 

 

But I also know that she's performing ahead by at least a grade level, and that she's performing at or ahead of the same level as other children who were tested. The gifted program is not only for profoundly gifted children but for children who could be working consistently one or two grade levels ahead.

 

 

 

So what I'm saying is that I agree, I'm not a good judge of my own kids' abilities, but that is precisely why I don't know whether I should put her in for testing. I don't want to put her in if it's just increasing the risk of a false positive, because that's unfair. But I also don't want to keep her out when I know plenty of people will put their kids in for a lot lower achievement, and when the reward for passing is so huge.

 

 

 

Thanks so much to everyone who has replied and shared your own personal stories. It has really helped me get some perspective. I will not bring it up to her teacher and if her teacher doesn't specifically mention her achievement during the conference, we won't test this year. If her teacher does mention it or mention that she's way ahead or something, then we will test.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After I found out about the test, I asked my neighbor about it, and she said her own daughter had been tested, and that she thought it was a really regrettable system, though she was very impressed by the kids who made it. She said that her daughter was an "almost made it" but got knocked down for not knowing double-digit multiplication. I was like, whoa. She has the test results and I guess you'll just have to trust me that it's highly unlikely she would be lying about this, given her character.

 

I can't help being intrigued by this.  Your neighbor's kid was tested at the beginning of 1st grade and missed the cutoff because of double-digit multiplication?

 

Do you mean as in 23 x 56?

 

Can your daughter do double-digit multiplication?

 

My gifted kid is not extremely "mathy," but she did get the 99th %ile on the ITBS in math, despite being a year young for her grade.  She's now 6.5.  I can't imagine what she'd do if presented with 23 x 56 on a test.  Does this mean I've failed as a mother?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The gifted program is not only for profoundly gifted children but for children who could be working consistently one or two grade levels ahead.

.........

I don't want to put her in if it's just increasing the risk of a false positive, because that's unfair.

If the gifted program is for kids who are one or two grade levels ahead as well, then I see no harm letting her sit for the screening tests. I'll wait for the test results to see how I want to proceed.

 

I don't see any harm with false positive. The false positive is only harmful if a child's self esteem is dependent on performance in the gifted program. Maybe I misinterpret your meaning of false positive though.

 

An off-topic but relevant, I know parents who prep their kids for mensa style tests.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I think it would tend to be less ethical to opt out of this program on the sole basis that you disagree with its ethics.  By doing so, you would not only deny your child services she needs, but you would be unable to effectively influence the program and the people administering it to change it for the better.  If you take advantage of the program, you will be able to get to know those who administer the program, gain their trust and respect and then share concerns and articles and such that would lead to change.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't help being intrigued by this.  Your neighbor's kid was tested at the beginning of 1st grade and missed the cutoff because of double-digit multiplication?

 

Do you mean as in 23 x 56?

 

Can your daughter do double-digit multiplication?

 

My gifted kid is not extremely "mathy," but she did get the 99th %ile on the ITBS in math, despite being a year young for her grade.  She's now 6.5.  I can't imagine what she'd do if presented with 23 x 56 on a test.  Does this mean I've failed as a mother?

 

I don't view my child's IQ as a reflection on my motherhood... ultimately if she can get a job and respects others I'm okay with that. :D

 

The double-digit, I assume, was 15 x 4 or something, one double digit. I didn't pry. One double-digit was enough to raise my eyebrows. She was sad because her child is very very smart, but didn't get in.

 

All I can say is, in our school district, about 90% of kids take the SAT and the average SAT score is in the 75th% nationally. That's our average. For 90% of the kids. So you can kind of imagine the households these children are coming from. The children don't have to be in the top 1% nationally--they have to be in the top 2% in this district. Which is, of course, a narrower band than the top 1% nationally.

 

Hence, the disconnect between national averages and whether or not you get into the gifted program here. I'm certain my daughter could get into the gifted program in the small town where her cousins attend school. This place is cutthroat, though. :)

 

 

I know parents who prep their kids for mensa style tests.

 

Yep, that's the COGAT prep, and it's considered an invalidation of the test. If the COGAT results and in-person interviews and other tests indicate prepping they can and will deny the child entrance to the program.

 

 

Can your daughter do double-digit multiplication?

 

No, but she can do some single-digit multiplication. She knows the principles, but she does it slowly, i.e. "Nine times two is eighteen... so eighteen plus eighteen... is twenty plus sixteen... is thirty six... so nine times four is thirty six." She knows her twos and some threes and fives by memory. Actually you could say she knows how to multiply with Lego bricks, LOL. 2x1, 2x3, 2x4, all the way through, and some threes that we had. The neighbor's child took the test at the end of the year. So, it is feasible for me to teach her double-digit multiplication by the test date, yes. She's willing to put in the work and she's capable.

 

But then, I'll bet that a good 50% of the kids in the school district, if you give them to me for a year, would be up to speed in math facts and double-digit addition and subtraction by the end of first grade, if I had them one at a time. I just don't think it's a sign of "giftedness".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't view my child's IQ as a reflection on my motherhood... ultimately if she can get a job and respects others I'm okay with that. :D

 

The double-digit, I assume, was 15 x 4 or something, one double digit. I didn't pry. One double-digit was enough to raise my eyebrows. She was sad because her child is very very smart, but didn't get in.

 

....

 

No, but she can do some single-digit multiplication. She knows the principles, but she does it slowly, i.e. "Nine times two is eighteen... so eighteen plus eighteen... is twenty plus sixteen... is thirty six... so nine times four is thirty six." She knows her twos and some threes and fives by memory. Actually you could say she knows how to multiply with Lego bricks, LOL. 2x1, 2x3, 2x4, all the way through, and some threes that we had. The neighbor's child took the test at the end of the year. So, it is feasible for me to teach her double-digit multiplication by the test date, yes. She's willing to put in the work and she's capable.

 

But then, I'll bet that a good 50% of the kids in the school district, if you give them to me for a year, would be up to speed in math facts and double-digit addition and subtraction by the end of first grade, if I had them one at a time. I just don't think it's a sign of "giftedness".

 

Oh, OK.  My daughter could do 15x4, and that would not be a big deal for many kids at the *end* of 1st grade.  The Singapore curruculum introduces simple multiplication in 1st grade.  [Coming down from my tree now.]

 

PS, to your final comment, the Singapore curriculum also does double-digit addition and subtraction with regrouping in 1st grade.  :)  I think it's too much for many kids, though.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, it's not a huge deal, but it is something that most kids must be trained to do. It's not that it's hard, it's just that it's not intuitive except for the extremely high IQ individuals.

 

Simple multiplication is introduced in our curriculum, but only conceptually: the children are not asked to memorize anything, but to link multi-element addition problems with multiplication formulae, e.g. 3 + 3 + 3 + 3 = 3 x 4.

 

There is a ways from there to double-digit addition because the child must be able to see the multiplication problem, do the multiplication relatively quickly, carry (probably), and use diagonal multiplication which again, while it's not hard to teach them, is hard to intuit the first time you've seen it.

 

My objection is that if you've been trained to do it, you can, but you can be equally fit for acceleration and not get it just because you haven't been trained, and that training depends on parental availability, knowledge of preparation requirements, and other things that are not equally distributed throughout society.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm, I really don't think it's unusual for a bright child to have heard of multiplication by the end of 1st grade.  And many kids have good enough number sense to do the likes of 15x4 without having been shown how to do it.  It's four fifteens.  Not really extreme for a gifted kid.  And that's the whole point, right?  To screen out those who are not gifted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I think it would tend to be less ethical to opt out of this program on the sole basis that you disagree with its ethics.  By doing so, you would not only deny your child services she needs, but you would be unable to effectively influence the program and the people administering it to change it for the better.  If you take advantage of the program, you will be able to get to know those who administer the program, gain their trust and respect and then share concerns and articles and such that would lead to change.  

 

:iagree:

 

Tracy said what I was thinking very succinctly. I don't believe that you will be able to change the system at all if you are not a part of it. 

 

In second grade, I moved to a new school district. I was distinctly aware that there were kids who left the class for a pull-out gifted program and assumed that I was not gifted because I was not one of them. "Not really gifted" became part of my self concept, even after I participated in gifted programs later. Last year while discussing testing for a friend's child, I mentioned it in passing and my mother told me I was not tested because I was new to the district. It would have saved me some childhood angst if I had known that at the time. In her defense, I probably never asked.

 

Because of my experience, if you choose to avoid the testing or the program, I suggest you thoroughly discuss your reasoning with your daughter.

 

I wish you the best!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Somewhat off topic, but the last comment sparked a thought.  What, if anything, does your daughter think of being in the gifted program?

 

My gifted daughter is honestly not shining her brightest in school.  Sometimes she makes silly mistakes and sometimes she leaves work unfinished in favor of getting back to her library book.  She's also a year younger than the other kids, so there are some things that aren't age-appropriate for her, such as writing quickly and neatly, planning and organizing, etc.  And she's hardheaded, so there are some things she just has to do her own way.  I don't push her at all, because I don't feel it's what she needs right now.  Anyhoo, later this year, they will select who gets into the gifted program.  I was told that grades and Terra Nova test scores along with teacher recommendation will be the starting point.  Well.  Her grades are not stellar, she had the flu during last year's Terra Novas, and although her teacher thinks she's smart, she may not like her work ethic.  My kid knows about the gifted program and I don't think she really wants to be in it.  If she doesn't want it or isn't willing to work for it, I don't feel like I should push it.  She's already accelerated and in a reasonably high-standard school.  Maybe that's enough.  Right now I am debating whether I should do anything myself if my kid doesn't get nominated by her teacher.  There is no question she is gifted, but that does not mean the gifted program is right for her.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

She sounds almost exactly like my son, honestly. We started practicing reading, on his request, when he was just shy of 5. He picked up blending easily, we did Progressive Phonics books and he read the "red words" without problems. But actual, fluent reading just kind of popped up this May. Let's see...my May 21st journal entry from this year (so 6 years 7 months) says "He's reading now...picking up books and asking for help with only one word in 20." My July 13th entry is about how he plowed through his first chapter book, a Magic Treehouse, in one sitting. :) He now reads on about a 3rd-4th grade level, we're going to work through Charlotte's Web together this week.

 

He's been adding fluently about the same amount of time, but a couple of months ago he seemed frustrated about subtraction so we worked on it and now it's pretty fluent. And he's gotten really good at skip-counting, to where he asked me the other night how many seconds are in 40 minutes, and I explained how to get the answer, and he did the heavy lifting himself. He also did some exercises on division by equal groups, and with just a bit of trial and error got answers like 36/6 correct. It's fun stuff to see them making connections!

 

A few things, though, make me hesitate to assume that my son is gifted or even high IQ. One is the reports of profoundly gifted kids' parents here. My kids are NOT on that level! Another is our pediatrician who said, when my son was an infant, that early verbal skill is the best predictor of high IQ. My son was on the late end for talking, and I guess I internalized the pediatrician's comment because I've pretty much scrubbed him mentally from Team Gifted. ;) Another factor is my daughter. She is crazily bright. At 4.5 she's reading fluently at a ~2nd grade level, adding and subtracting with great number sense, etc. Crazy kid just listened to an audiobook version of Robinson Crusoe today, and reported back on the content with great comprehension. *She* might be gifted, we'll have to see how she continues to progress. Jury's definitely still out on my son. If we had a chance to be tracked into a gifted program, I would not be attached to getting him in. I might think differently about her.

 

Educational choice is so overwhelming and complicated! How could you *not* want the very best for your kids, right?!

I wouldn't go on early milestones to predict giftedness. Not all gifted kids talk, walk or read early. My PG son did none of these things - though once he started school in April he got to reading magic treehouse by November. He could do maths preschool but we weren't talking amazing earth dropping stuff. I would never have got him tested without pressure from a friend.

 

I forgot to answer the question. To me the answer in this case is NO. While on the whole I think refusing to do things against your ethics is right (and it has caused me a lot of difficulty) I don't think you should inflict your ethics in your daughter. A medical system where only the rich receive proper treatment is unethical but if you can by all means you should take your child to the doctor.

 

If you see an ethical problem then you should work on fixing it not your daughter who isn't old enough to see the problem.

 

Does that help?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

All I can say is, in our school district, about 90% of kids take the SAT and the average SAT score is in the 75th% nationally. That's our average. For 90% of the kids. So you can kind of imagine the households these children are coming from. The children don't have to be in the top 1% nationally--they have to be in the top 2% in this district. Which is, of course, a narrower band than the top 1% nationally.

 

 

It sounds like the district has many advantaged and bright students. That said, I'd keep in mind that the average of 75%tile average for the SAT is not necessarily a sign of students being particularly gifted or well educated. According to the College Board only 43% of students who take the SAT score as college-ready (which is basically prediction that they would be able to earn a first year college GPA of B- or above). So, average national average is actually not college ready.

 

I am a bit leery of putting a lot of stock in the second hand recounting of other people about the level of the test. The only way you are really going to know is if your daughter tests. One thing I'd keep in mind is if you opt not to have her test and she is aware of the program, she may be drawing conclusions about her abilities even absent the scores.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Update: Apparently my child was recommended for the program (still needs testing) by the teacher, but I need to ask if this is a wide-net recommendation or if she thinks my daughter really needs acceleration. I also learned that the test takes seven hours!

 

 

It sounds like the district has many advantaged and bright students. That said, I'd keep in mind that the average of 75%tile average for the SAT is not necessarily a sign of students being particularly gifted or well educated. 

 

Yes, the district has a very high number of advantaged and academically-oriented families.

 

 

 

According to the College Board only 43% of students who take the SAT score as college-ready (which is basically prediction that they would be able to earn a first year college GPA of B- or above).  

So, average national average is actually not college ready.

 

Well, yes, but that's still the 57th% and above are college ready. My point was to highlight that a child who will test as "accelerated" in one district will not necessarily test that high in another district, because acceleration is ready. The top 2% here might overlap, score-wise, with the top .5% in a district where they have a large percentage of ELLs or children who are otherwise disadvantaged.

 

 

I am a bit leery of putting a lot of stock in the second hand recounting of other people about the level of the test. The only way you are really going to know is if your daughter tests. One thing I'd keep in mind is if you opt not to have her test and she is aware of the program, she may be drawing conclusions about her abilities even absent the scores.

 

Oh ugh, I didn't even think about that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

Ă—
Ă—
  • Create New...