The answer, then, should be apparent: more identification. Though they are not perfect, studies show IQ tests are reliable, backed by data, and normed to compare individual results to the general population scores, rendering them a valuable barometer of giftedness. IQ tests are the most straightforward measure of giftedness because they are designed to compare an individual’s abilities to the population average. Given these vulnerabilities, it is crucial to identify gifted children as early as possible. The complex needs that arise from asynchronous development, disability, and socioemotional issues are challenging to address in mixed-ability classrooms. (Picture a five-year-old who reads at an eighth-grade level but has trouble making friends or handling scissors.) Like other gifted children, they face challenges related to asynchronous development, which describes the discrepancy between intellectual precociousness and average or below-average social or motor skills. Twice-exceptional students, those who are gifted but also have learning disabilities, are significantly harder to identify and are often overlooked. In fact, many gifted students underachieve, particularly those with ADHD, dyslexia, and autism. It’s also important to note that giftedness is not synonymous with high achievement. The issue of racial underrepresentation is real, but the solution is to better identify underserved gifted students, not fuss over cosmetic issues. No child should be admitted to or barred from a gifted program with the goal of balancing demographic quotas. They are not tokens to represent their races in some kind of equity equation. If a program works for the majority of students, it’s simply not a gifted program.Ĭontrary to what Brilliant NYC suggested, gifted students have unique needs and abilities. ” By definition, gifted students need extra support. The federal government defines gifted students as those “who give evidence of high achievement capability in areas such as intellectual, creative, artistic, or leadership capacity, or in specific academic fields, and who need services or activities not ordinarily provided by the school in order to fully develop those capabilities". While everyone has gifts and talents, not everyone is gifted and talented. Giftedness is not just a high score on an exam, but a specific psychological profile characterized by strengths and challenges alike. Like so many “Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion” initiatives, Brilliant NYC’s premise began with a reasonable idea: the racial makeup of gifted programs serves as a useful indicator of disparities, and the disproportionately low representation of black and Hispanic students in gifted programs points to a need for change.īut rather than devoting more resources to identifying gifted students in underserved communities, the policy’s proponents took things to an irrational extreme, concluding that because certain races are currently overrepresented in gifted programs, the very concept of giftedness is itself racist. But although Brilliant NYC will never see the light of day, its near-success is a dire warning of what could happen if gifted education falls victim to the equity police. The latest battle in the fight for New York City’s gifted students has been won. Instead, Adams plans to improve the identification process for gifted kids and devote more resources to students with learning disabilities.
The backlash following de Blasio’s announcement of Brilliant NYC was swift, and his successor, Eric Adams, has promised to scrap the program. Instead of exams, students could get in with teacher nominations or even via lottery. The selection criteria for gifted programs would also have changed. To address these issues, former Mayor Bill de Blasio proposed a now-cancelled program, Brilliant NYC, which would have required teachers to provide students with resources based on their abilities, rather than separating children by skill level. They also contended that the admissions exam, whose items resemble those found in traditional IQ tests, was administered too early in students’ careers. Critics argued that the entrance exam disproportionately favors Asian and white students- who made up 43% and 36% percent of the program, respectively. In October 2021, New York City announced that it was phasing out its gifted and talented programs for elementary schools.
0 kommentar(er)
