Is every child special? Absolutely. Does every child have strengths and weaknesses? Of course. No one is good at everything and we're all good at something. But those are individual differences that have little to do with determining whether a child is or is not gifted.
Johnnie may be the best in his class in math, while Janie is best in writing. Other children in the class may be the best in other areas, but being the best in the class doesn't make a child gifted. These children are just demonstrating their strengths.
Gifted children are special needs children; they have special educational needs that other children do not have. In general, they require a faster pace since they need fewer repetitions and less practice to master concepts. They also do best when they are able to explore a topic in greater depth than is usually found in the regular curriculum.
And yet, we still face the belief that all children are gifted. I found this once again in Huffington Post article by Jennifer Evans Gardner on the gifted program in Los Angeles schools. She complains about the GATE program, whose mission statement says, "...all students are to receive an education appropriate to their individual capabilities, interests, and needs."
What's her complaint? She says, "'All students?' What about the children who aren't flagged as gifted? Where is their 'individualized program'?" I'm not sure the mission statement promises an individualized program for every child, but I'm also not sure that's Gardner's main gripe. She says, "...the children who aren't identified often get stuck with a less challenging curriculum, often with the 'general population' of the school."
That is a telling statement. If the other children aren't being challenged, there is something wrong with the regular curriculum that has nothing to do with any GATE program. If a gifted program were truly designed for gifted kids, it really wouldn't be good for the other kids.
Michael Clay Thompson wrote a wonderfully eloquent response to the claim that all children are gifted. I wish Gardner and others who make that claim would read his response.
Johnnie may be the best in his class in math, while Janie is best in writing. Other children in the class may be the best in other areas, but being the best in the class doesn't make a child gifted. These children are just demonstrating their strengths.
Gifted children are special needs children; they have special educational needs that other children do not have. In general, they require a faster pace since they need fewer repetitions and less practice to master concepts. They also do best when they are able to explore a topic in greater depth than is usually found in the regular curriculum.
And yet, we still face the belief that all children are gifted. I found this once again in Huffington Post article by Jennifer Evans Gardner on the gifted program in Los Angeles schools. She complains about the GATE program, whose mission statement says, "...all students are to receive an education appropriate to their individual capabilities, interests, and needs."
What's her complaint? She says, "'All students?' What about the children who aren't flagged as gifted? Where is their 'individualized program'?" I'm not sure the mission statement promises an individualized program for every child, but I'm also not sure that's Gardner's main gripe. She says, "...the children who aren't identified often get stuck with a less challenging curriculum, often with the 'general population' of the school."
That is a telling statement. If the other children aren't being challenged, there is something wrong with the regular curriculum that has nothing to do with any GATE program. If a gifted program were truly designed for gifted kids, it really wouldn't be good for the other kids.
Michael Clay Thompson wrote a wonderfully eloquent response to the claim that all children are gifted. I wish Gardner and others who make that claim would read his response.
Interesting article. I think that until the day comes when we really understand how each and every child learns and what each and every child knows then we will continue to have children fall through the cracks. In every aspect of our education systems. Unless Parents take the interest and are involved DAILY in their childrens education process there will be children who are not challenged enough and children that are challenged too much. After the year I have spent with my two youngest children during the 2009-2010 school year in Florida, school is not about learning, teaching or even education for that matter, it is about TEST TAKING. And It is quite sad…
I do not believe the article is stating that all children are gifted in the special needs definition presented here. What I do believe is that the article takes issue with two things: the identification process for gifted children, and the lack of individualized education options for those not identified as gifted or learning disabled. I see these issues as real issues that deserve to be discussed. And based on this quote from Melanie Smolin’s article, “Gifted Kids: Are the Best Minds Being Left Behind?” also paraphrased in a previous post:
While our failure to identify and develop giftedness among low income and minority children is particularly glaring, according to the National Association of Gifted Children (NAGC)’s 2008-2009 report on the overall state of gifted education nationwide, high-ability learners across all demographic groups are suffering from inadequate instruction, services and support.
Can there really be any question that the issue of the processes used in identifying the gifted be flagged for further discussion?
Identifying gifted children is always a problem, but it becomes an even bigger one when people don’t understand that gifted children have special academic needs and the identification process turns into some kind of contest. Gardner, a food and travel writer, not an expert on gifted children, seems to be one of those people.
Her article clearly states that all children are gifted. Gardner says, “Every child is gifted in his or her own way, and all children deserve a good education.” Adding that all children deserve a good education confuses the issue. If other children are not challenged by the regular curriculum, it is not the fault of gifted kids or the gifted program. There is a problem with the regular curriculum.
If Gardner has an issue with other kids not being challenged, she should write about the problems with that curriculum, not with the process used to identify gifted kids.
Giftedness will occur. Period. It won’t be distributed equally or otherwise politically-correctly, but wherever the heck it decides to show up (randomly even). Some will make use of it, some won’t. Of those those who will, some may do so for good and some not. People differ in ability and how they express that ability. That’s about it.
As I was reading Carol’s post and the succeeding comments, I was reminded by Stephanie Tolan’s article “ Is it a Cheetah?”, where Ms. Tolan metaphorically discussed giftedness using cheetah’s characteristics. I have the following thoughts and connections to Ms. Carol’s blog and Ms. Tolan’s article; How do we really identify giftedness? Is giftedness a biological / mental make-up or is it a manifested behavior? A cheetah is still a cheetah even if it does not run. A cheetah is a cheetah as long as its biological / mental make-up is that of a cheetah. A child is gifted even if it does not manifest giftedness in flashy or traditional notion of giftedness, such a winning contests or earning good grades. Granting that giftedness is an innate talent, how can the teacher identify giftedness unless a gifted child shows behaviors of giftedness? But how can a child show behaviors of giftedness if the necessary conditions such as “playing field” and “antelope” are not present? Both questions feed on each other. So, how do we identify gifted students? For cheetah, it is not difficult because there are other characteristics like skin color, body built, and other visual attributes. For children, it is hard to identify who is gifted because (1) There are varied domains of giftedness (e.g. science, language, arts, numbers, sports, music, etc), and (2) It takes another gifted, or at least someone who understands giftedness, to identify who is gifted, and therefore is in the position to nurture them. Can a gifted student be taught by an average teacher? Does a gifted student need an instructor to instruct them about content, or a coach to inspire them to strive hard to catch the antelope?
What are the necessary conditions for giftedness to flourish? For cheetah, to nurture its “giftedness”, two conditions are needed: (1) a playing field wide enough for it to attain its top speed (2) an antelope fast enough to pose a real challenge to satisfy their hunger (something to run for).A cage limiting cheetah as animals to be displayed and not as animals to run; and a caretaker generous enough to spoon-fed the cheetah and cruel enough not to challenge it. On the same note, to nurture their giftedness, gifted students need a stage where to perform and not a cage to limit their giftedness. They need a goal high enough to bring the best out of them, a challenge hard enough to motivate them. Stakeholders of education need to recognize this eminent danger: A school programmed for equity instead of excellence which limits the students’ giftedness to earning good grades and meeting the VSC assessment limits; and a teacher and administrator who does not understand or have very limited knowledge about giftedness and therefore spoon-fed the gifted students rather than draw out the best out of them. But isn’t it that the world is designed and run by average persons for average persons doing average tasks and dreaming average dreams.
I know as absolute truth that most children are not gifted and very few are. Talent is possessed by very few and most of us and children do not have any talent or are not gifted, In fact most of us are totally good at nothing. We are just mediocre or average. I was very much like that only to be told that I was worthless and useless.