Finding The Teachers ' Perception About The Giftedness Early Childhood

In 2015, I wrote about my personal philosophy of the gifted learner. I stated in my paper that, “Giftedness is not a one, set definition. The definition of gifted must encompass intellect, ability, creative talent as well as emotional awareness. It cannot be micro-managed and be a “one size fits all” definition” (Dauber, 2015). People, who are gifted, need differentiation and opportunity to express, demonstrate and show their giftedness. Educators must be able to provide opportunities for the gifted learner to express his/her abilities and/or talents. Gifted students learn differently and require special educational experiences in order to grow academically and achieve their highest potential. Therefore, the education field must be able to understand not only the cognitive side of a gifted learner but the affective or social/emotional aspects too.

One of the difficulties in identifying the needs of low-income students is the profound cultural barriers which exist that prevent their strengths and deficits from being identified. Children from low-income homes frequently have poorer vocabularies and a weaker basis of the type of knowledge that is frequently considered 'intelligence' on most forms of assessment. A low-income child's IQ may be high, even though he lacks a framework of accepted middle-class knowledge. "In January 2003, the National Academy of Sciences released a report on the seeming overrepresentation of minorities in special education and underrepresentation of those students in gifted education. The NRC reported that, nationwide, 7.47 percent of all white students and 9.9 percent of Asian students are placed in gifted programs. Meanwhile, 3.04 percent of African-American students, 3.57 percent of Hispanic students, and 4.86 percent of American Indian students are classified as gifted" (GT-minority identification, 2003, ERIC Clearinghouse). The discrepancy, the NAS believed, could not be solely explained by talent alone but was at least partially rooted in the methods of identifying students labeled as gifted. Biases in standardized and other tests identifying student strengths, combined with prejudices, however unintentional, amongst educators and administrators lead to under-identification of the gifted

gifted students within those states, and are not consistent across the United States. “Seven states

Mala Morrow is a gifted student. She was identified as being gifted after she scored in the 98 percentile on the Test of Cognitive Skills (TCS). She maintained an A average while she was enrolled in elementary school, now as a middle schooler she has a cumulative grade point average (GPA) of 3.9. Mala’s ethnicity is Indian. She is actively learning, English, German, and she is fluent in two different Arabic dialects. These attributes clearly define that Mala is properly labeled as a gifted and talented student.

I evaluated the information in the document above based upon Moon’s (2013) nine measures to consider in comprehensive gifted education program. I think that FCCPS does a considerably good job addressing these nine guidelines. However, I believe they should consider more non-standardized materials and data while considering students for identification.

Many educators feel that teachers aren’t trained to teach gifted students. Teaching accountability has teachers focus more on

Gifted students are mistakenly perceived as individuals with the intellectual capacity to excel in their endeavors whether it is academically, artistically, athletically, or musically; however, this is one of the most common myths educators believe. According to the National Association for Gifted Children (n.d.), gifted students are those who have outstanding abilities to reason and learn or who demonstrate exceptional proficiency in one or more areas such as mathematics, language, painting, dance, sports, and more. With this definition, the gifted youth likely are capable of achieving their goals on their own, but these kids have demands that must be met in order for them to succeed. Some teachers argue that gifted students do not require

Based on the information you have read in the text and any experiences you have had as a teacher, what do you think are the issues gifted students face as they go through school?

Typically gifted and talented programs are intended to challenge fast pace learners and recognize their special abilities, however the innocuous separation between peers can prevent other students’ talents from being acknowledged and advanced. While the gifted and talented students are applauded for their intellectual capabilities and natural talents, other students are labeled as average or less skilled. Placement into these programs are rooted from the results of standardized testing, which students and teachers spend a great amount of time preparing for. Preparation for these exams alter the curriculum and objective for learning all together. Some education systems seem to focus more on teaching to test rather than teaching to educate. In Cathy Davidson essay, “Project Classroom Makeover,” she explores how there should be more emphases on the relevance, relationship and rigor in the classroom and how this can teach students more efficiently and improve our school. Within the past 15 years, advancements in technology alone theoretically have created new prospective ways of learning, therefore standardized testing may be an inadequate method of testing students’ talents and abilities. Because each student’s future is so heavily weighted on their performance throughout grade school, education systems should have a well-rounded system in place that allows students to support and learn from each other rather than creating a divide between the strong versus the poor test

I found it interesting 50% of public schools are rural. We are a city school district, yet we are considered a rural district in the Mooresville Graded School District. According to our reading in Colangelo’s Handbook of Gifted Education rural schools have many benefits for students including smaller class size, lower dropout rates and more community support. I believe when you have smaller school districts and schools you have more contact with your students and you are able to individualize and accommodate more when dealing with your students.

Currently the Jacob K. Javits Gifted and Talented Students Act of 1988 is the only national law which directly addresses gifted children, and is the sole channel for federal funding of gifted education (Russo and Ford; Inman and Kirchner 10). The Act reinstated, expanded, and updated programs which had been cut, but it has several limitations (Russo and Ford). It does not address the needs of students or mandate creation of gifted programs (Inman and Kirchner 10; Russo and Ford). Instead, it allocates money, ranging from $0 to $11.2 million, for research grants (Inman and Kirchner 10). It also does not set “substantive or procedural due process safeguards” as IDEA does (Russo and Ford). Although the Act has great intentions, it can be ignored by states or districts which do not place priority on gifted students (Russo and Ford).

There is a great need for education reform in urban school systems. Many of the students are struggling to reach academic achievement. In order to meet the needs of all students, the school system needs to examine the curriculum to identify opportunities to implement a gifted education program (Steenbergen-Hu, 2016). Although my district has one program focusing on grades 2-8, there is still a need for a drastic change. The program needs to be expanded beyond the one school and 7 classrooms.

The topic of gifted and talented education is one that has always sparked debates among parents and teachers, and recent movements towards totally integrating classrooms have added to this debate. For many years now, "average" children, gifted and

I observed a teacher name Ms. L, she is a four year old teacher. She has 15 kids on roll however, only 10 were present. There they stood animated, four boys and six girls. I observed Ms. L’s room around 5 O’clock P.M. The schedule stats, time for free choice. She works from 9am to 6pm, and still keeps a smile on her face. The hour I was in her class I could tell she was an effective teacher by the way she engaged with students. She still had the patience to keep her students engaged, even while they made choices of their own. Although I was only in the classroom an hour you could tell she had the uniqueness to motivate all her students even the ones with unpleasant temper tantrums. Her learning centers had so many activities, which was on shelves and tables. These centers would have you thinking and wanting to learn more. She had an awesome hands on science center where children had the ability to

As a teacher leader, I guide educators to develop their love for teaching in a manner that