The other thread talks about various other related issues, so I thought it best to start a new thread about this specific question. What should replace the current format of G&T programs? DH was in an school-enrichment program and thinks it useless. It disrupted his relationships with his schoolmates and didn't offer much in terms of academics. My overall opinion is that providing advanced academic content is easy. Most gifted kids are motivated and in the internet era, opportunities are numerous. Bigger issues are developing work ethics and finding a peer group that gives a sense of belonging and validation.
Â
I think in-school enrichment (eg. via pull-out for specific classes) is the way to go, but obviously as your DH's experience shows, it can be done well or badly. I agree that rather than academic content, a focus on challenging projects that develop work ethic/perseverance/resilience is important. (And I say that as someone who developed absolutely no work ethic in ES, and had to scramble to learn to actually apply myself when I tested into HCHS!)
I agree with the posters who were stating on the other thread(s) that it doesn't really need to be started in K (apart from the broader integration-related goals of inducing parents to send their kids to schools they wouldn't otherwise). 2nd or 3rd grade would make sense if it was just about offering these kids what they need.
Don't you get it. They will not replace it with anything. It is already almost November and they have ZERO plans for next year. The only think they can possibly do is abolish it, if we let them (so write to your elected official so they do not!).
Also, if they do abolish it they will likely add a once-per-week 30 min "enrichment" zoom class that will have 60 kids and one teacher and be completely useless. That will be your new G&T.
If you do not understand where Carranza stands on these issues, I have a bridge to sell you.
The focus right now should be to preserve what we already have.
I think expecting children of higher ability to find enrichment on the internet is specious. it's like telling someone it's OK they don't earn a living wage because they can always get a second job at night. If I send my kid to school for 30+ hours a week, he should get an appropriate education during that time. Being unusual doesn't mean he relinquishes that right.
I have what we believe is a truly "gifted" child. I take no credit for this--my DH happens to have a stratospheric IQ. It's also not a uniformly great thing--it comes with some real and difficult challenges. It's more like a form of SN than anything else.
But my son really benefits from accelerated education in a way he never did from the more progressive models we've tried in the past. He also aced the G &T test with no prep and when he was done, asked the administrator for more questions, because he said they were "fun".
There should be a place for kids like him in the public system.
The reality is that the public system is not meant for especially advanced cases. All they can do is advance him grade wise, which may not be great from a social-emotional perspective. He's an excellent candidate for a school like Hunter or Speyer, etc. Either that, or regular public school plus a ton of outside enrichment and development.
@Anonymous The public system is working exceptionally well for him at the moment, actually. He's at a citywide G&T, at the appropriate grade level, with an accelerated curriculum.
^also, I love the way you completely refute the point I made about how public schools should provide an appropriate education to my child. I am a taxpaying citizen like everyone else, and my child has a right to this like anyone else does. I don't live in Manhattan, so we are not eligible for Hunter ES.
Or are you suggesting that parents of gifted children start suing the city for private tuition, the way many parents of SN children are already doing?
I, personally, am not comfortable going there, but I suppose we might be seeing more of this going forward.