Time for a Change in Schools: How to Help Gifted Students

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

High IQ is still considered part of definition of gifted and talented, and most students who are so categorized have IQs above 130. Children who are intellectually gifted typically have strong motivation. (Colangelo & Davis, 2009; Gottfriend & Gottfried, 2004). They also are academically superior, usually learn to read early, and generally do excellent work in most school areas. One of the most important studies of children with intellectual gifts, begun by Lewis Terman in 1926. Terman ‘s

There are many myths surrounding the education of gifted students. According to Cross (2002), some of these myths include: gifted students should spend time with their age peers, gifted students should be well rounded, giftedness is a natural occurrence, professionals who work with gifted students understand the their social and emotional needs, adults truly understand what it is like to be gifted in today’s society, messages about being too smart, and the age old statement that all students are gifted. While these myths are prevalent in education, they are myths and we need to be enlightened and dispel these myths.

Using teachers to screen for potential gifted students gives a basis for more formal testing of the students. However, the district must first define their own requirements for a gifted program. Primarily, a higher than average IQ score, general good grades, leadership abilities, and creative abilities should be considered when looking to identify gifted students. While all of these characteristics are important, it is also important to note that students may not possess all of them, and may only have a gifted talent in one specific area of study. When a teacher suspects giftedness, they should refer the student to the guidance counselor or school psychologist, who can then set up a formal assessment to determine if the student has enough of the characteristics to qualify as gifted by the state. After students have been identified, it is then important to secure a GIEP (Gifted Individual Education Plan) and make greater opportunities available. However, as mentioned above, the first step is to use the tools described above to identify students in need of the gifted

For that matter, minority students may enter a G&T program without the skills necessary for success; for example independence, speaking skills, organization, and goal setting skills (Lovett, 2011, p.57). Without these skills we are simply adding to the stress of being in a G&T program for minority students so it’s important than as a teacher we include lessons which teach our students who are gifted and talented the skills needed to be able to manage themselves. This goes beyond just what is expected of students who are gifted and talented in the classroom but these skills can be utilized outside of school in their home and work

Principle 1: High-Quality Curriculum for Gifted Learners Uses a Conceptual Approach to Organize or Explore Content that is Discipline Based and Integrative

Though there were many interviews ranging from elementary to high school teachers who teach gifted children, I chose to reflect on the elementary teacher. I thought this information was the most beneficial to me since I am in an elementary school. The elementary gifted teacher gave me a lot of insight about many of my students and what to expect in their future. The gifted program in the elementary school is from first through fifth grades. Many students are not tested in kindergarten because they want to make sure the giftedness is truly there not just high achieving tendencies. Some students may test at the end of their kindergarten year, but they do not start being served in the gifted program until first grade.

The public school system in urban districts is in need of a great reform (Moon 2016). The teachers in collaboration with the school administration are struggling to identify strategies to use in increasing student achievement. In order to meet the needs of all of their students, the schools have been examining their classroom instructional practices to identify opportunities to implement gifted educational strategies. In my school district, there is only one program benefiting from the gifted education program. The program currently focuses on grades 2-8. However, there is a need to expand the program in other elementary schools as well as the high schools.

terms of a discrepancy between a child’s school performance and some ability index such as an IQ score.” (Delisle & Galbraith, 2002). “Gifted children who do not succeed in school are often successful in outside activities such as sports, social events, after-school jobs, talent or hobby interests.” (Delisle & Galbraith, 2002). So we wonder what causes the underachievement.

The literature reviewed indicated there is an absence of consensus or discussion in the education literature about the characteristics of ‘high ability’ in different curriculum areas, relatively few practical studies of gifted and talented enrichment education and placement of advanced learners; much of the literature is limited and the result of individual, albeit well-motivated, practice; and consequently, evidence-based policy and practice are scarce. Instead, much of the literature reflects individual experience and/or impression. While this is important and valuable, it is different from rigorously conducted research studies for longitudinal end results. Previous research focused on the perception of students and teachers, how classes

I believe that with effective implementation of a gifted education program and proper training for educators, there can be improvements in the classroom. To begin the implementation, the teachers would need to be trained in gifted education program

In South Carolina, as with most states, educational funding has decreased. Yet, between 2002 and 2004 there continued to be an upsurge of students who had been labeled as gifted (Fall Learning. 2005). Efforts continue in South Carolina and elsewhere to improve upon the training of educators who work with gifted students. School districts have instituted professional development training programs and the state of South Carolina has mandated that additional endorsements must be earned by educators who wish to continue working with the gifted student(s).

There are some advances being made to identify and support students who have a higher educational, emotional, and social need. This part of the article summary the author gives a list of goals and practices that will better serve gifted learners. These methods or practices will challenge gifted learners and increase their learning abilities.

Teachers, administrators, parents, students, and community members in a district are by far the most aware of the diversity present in those areas and how best to serve their gifted student populations, specifically in relation to ethnic, racial, and socio-economic concerns. A local definition of giftedness allows for policy making to occur on home turf, where best practices catering to specific groups of gifted students can be utilized and the scope of the definition is able to be more succinct in targeting certain student needs. As the National Association for Gifted Children (NAGC) states, the goal of a definition of giftedness is to “provide the framework for gifted education programs and services, and guide key decisions such as which students will qualify for services, the areas of giftedness to be address with programming, when the services will be offered, and even why they will be offered (NAGC-Def). Districts have the advantage of knowing their students, populations, and communities. There are, however, some downsides in allowing localities to write their own definition of giftedness and the ramifications of what follows. First, the school district must have qualified administrators and educators creating the policies. According to a study done by the NAGC for the 2012-2013 school year, 43 percent of states responding to a survey do not require professionals working in gifted and talented programs to have certification or endorsement in gifted and talented education. Fairly bleak numbers, although a federal mandate requiring gifted programs in every school district will most likely change this fact. Next, locally defined characteristics of giftedness