The Current State Of Gifted and Talented Education

The current state of gifted and talented education in the United States is a rocky one. Many opinions and viewpoints hover over the fact that No Child Left Behind is indeed leaving behind our most talented students, while others argue that pushing for Gifted and Talented programs is promoting an elitist group, maybe quite similar to the population that the Eugenic Psychologist Francis Galton hoped for. But is pushing for smarter children and enhancing those who are already gifted such a bad idea? With the shortage of science, technology, engineering and mathematics workers, one would certainly think not! Think back to the video with John Stossel, “Stupid in America” and the young man who was 18 years old and could not even read. Obviously, the school systems were not helping him earn a desirable place in society, so would it be so bad to further a gifted child’s abilities who could in turn accomplish ten times more?

With No Child Left Behind’s idea of having each student proficient by the year 2014, and closing or penalizing those schools who do not meet annual yearly progress, how is this not leaving behind those students who do achieve or who are beyond proficient? The act is blatantly hurting those children with the will and the skills to succeed in a school system, especially those who are affected by children who fail to care about their education, or those who are just not good test takers. If teachers are solely concentrating on those students who are struggling or lagging behind, just to have their school meet annual yearly progress, what are they doing with the students who are high achievers? These students tend to be ignored and, consequently may become bored with their daily school routine and quite possibly find ways to “spice it up” by acting out or becoming the class clown. Aside from boredom, a student’s scores may slip from advanced to proficient. According to Susan Goodkin in an article she wrote for the Washington Post in 2005, she claims that her school’s standardized test scores reflect “the schools' inattention to high performers, they show that students achieving ‘advanced’ math scores early in elementary school all too frequently regress to merely ‘proficient’ scores by the end.” But, as some educators and supporters of No Child Left Behind may see it, proficient is just enough to get by and make annual yearly progress. When lumped into one phrase, Ann Sheldon, executive director for of the Ohio Association of Gifted Children says it the best “These [gifted] kids don't really count for anything in the federal accountability system” (2007). In turn, more parents and their students are opting to pull their children out of the public school system and send them to private schools where they can receive the one on one attention they deserve.

Although some states, such as Ohio have either cut or not improved funding for gifted and talented programs, other states such as Minnesota and Kentucky have made great bounds to ensure that their gifted student population is receiving the attention and recognition they need by increasing spending and opening up accelerated programs in mathematics and science. New Jersey is also making strides in gifted and talented education; mandating for early identification, curriculum modifications, and early intervention among others. In addition to this flip side, it is true that the No Child Left Behind Act does provide schools with the option to “apply for grants to recruit and train teachers to work with special-needs students, including gifted students” (Ludwig, 2003). The Jacob J. Javits Act provides funding for gifted programs, oversees gifted education in the United States, provides for research on gifted and talented education, and as of 2003 had a federal budget of $11.25 million. So, there may be light at the end of the tunnel, but when are our gifted students and parents going to reach it?

References

Goodkin, S. & Gold, D.G. “The Gifted Children Left Behind” (2007). http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/26/AR2007082600909.html

Goodkin, S. “Leave no Gifted Child Behind” (2005). http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/26/AR2005122600553.html

“Jacob J. Javits and Talented Students Education Program” (2008). http://www.ed.gov/programs/javits/index.html.

Ludwig, S. “Providing for Gifted Children Through the No Child Left Behind Act” (2003). http://www.dukegiftedletter.com/articles/vol4no1_connex.html

Ramirez, E. “For Talented Students, Challenges Grow” (2007). http://www.usnews.com/articles/education/2007/11/02/gifted-students.html