Comments on: Clairemont Principal Not Returning Next Year

By: sitting pugs

sitting pugs — Tue, 13 Apr 2010 04:51:07 +0000

Problem is that it’s not just a gift, it’s a need too.

And having super-sized cognitive brain function and intellectual aptitude isn’t quite the same as having an amazing jump shot, pitching arm, or kicking foot. If a child displayed virtuoso-type talent for music or sports, that child’s abilities would be attentively nurtured and cultivated.

How quickly and eagerly a child can and wants to learn concepts, facts and figures, and ways of thinking and communicating is certainly a need as much as it is a “talent,” but it isn’t always given adequate attention?

Having a photographic memory or a substantially larger vocabulary might get someone in the most advanced classes available. Any third-grader that can spell and use the word “verisimilitude” in a sentence deserves a chance to do a book report on a Kafka story.

I recall some teacher saying when I was in high school that mixing high and low intellectual metabolic students in one class is ultimately more beneficial because over time, their aptitudes would balance each other out or something to that effect. So, what does that become? Reverting back to the mean for some and going up and beyond the bare minimum in terms of effort (class participation) and productivity (gpa)?

By: B

Mon, 12 Apr 2010 18:52:11 +0000

Gifted fairy my foot. My son works his little back-end off for the grades he gets. (Yes, he’s in the “gifted program.”) The only kids i think are gifted are the ones taking calculus in elementary school or playing Brahms at age 6. And i don’t think CSD has that many of those. (Aren’t something like 25% of the CSD kids ‘gifted”?) It has always reminded me of lake wobegan (where they are all above average.)

By: karass

karass — Mon, 12 Apr 2010 15:18:53 +0000

Problem is that it’s not just a gift, it’s a need too. At least that’s the argument as to why we have to spend more money on services for gifted children–otherwise they won’t reach their academic potential. Bottom line is that the classroom teacher has an awful lot of special needs groups to deal with in their classroom. It’s not just a simple “Now it’s math time everyone” like in the classrooms of yore. The amount of differentiation in instruction that a teacher is supposed to achieve in their classroom and still maintain classroom order and a positive environment is mindboggling. Without some extra hands, e.g. specialists and paraprofessionals, differentiated instruction is just rhetoric, not something that students actually receive.

I recommend that all parents and interested community members find a way to help out IN a classroom on a regular basis to see what actually happens. It’s hard to understand otherwise.

By: TeeRuss

TeeRuss — Mon, 12 Apr 2010 14:25:01 +0000

““Gifted” makes it sound like some kids got lucky when the Gift Fairy came around the Newborn Nursery and others did not.”

Well, that’s pretty much the deal. Some people have higher aptitudes, IQ’s, abilities etc. than others. “Gifted” works fine for me.

By: karass

karass — Mon, 12 Apr 2010 14:18:59 +0000

I like “high intellectual metabolism” because it describes the situation well. “Gifted” makes it sound like some kids got lucky when the Gift Fairy came around the Newborn Nursery and others did not. Gifted programs are not some kind of reward that kids earn. Some kids truly need special accelerated learning because they otherwise would be bored or frustrated or ostracized and would not learn well without special services. They need special services to reach their academic potential just like children with dyslexia or hearing deficits do.