Public Schools, Gifted Education

[integratedvelocity]

I looked through all the threads in Work and Education and couldn't find any that dealt specifically with the public school system. Being American, my expertise is naturally limited to US schools. However, comparisons with other countries are great too!

I went to a very small rural public school. There were about 80 students per grade and it was the largest high school in the county. There had been no gifted education for several years by the time I attended. The only APs left were Calc AB, US History, Env. Science, Bio., and Psych. I took them all except for Environmental Science (a waste of a course slot, IMO) and took English lit online through Northwestern University.

I was always frustrated by how I had to do everything myself. I loved my guidance counselor, but she could only devote so many resources to my needs. After all, I was successful enough to go to college; there were many other students with more pressing issues, like having babies, abortions, getting married, getting a GED, and so on. I had no help on college applications except giving my GC my application essay so she could read through it right before I submitted the Common Application.

I hesitate to complain too strongly about my school. I have often gotten the response that I can do well enough by myself, why should a public school go out of its way to help me get further ahead of my peers? Then there are the usual accusations of elitism. Though I would probably be less arrogant if I had met other people with equal intelligence earlier in life.

I am still a little bitter about the education provided by the United States government. Yes, I have been successful. I got into one of the best colleges in the world, will probably have a starting salary about twice that of the average college graduate, and appear to have been not permanently damaged. But I feel that I have been ill-prepared to actually be successful in the long run out in the larger world. I am not prepared to compete, network, or discipline myself like many of my new peers.

What is your opinion of your education? Am I being too demanding or showing a sense of entitlement? Did you go to a public, private, charter, or other special school?

[buddingscholar]

Ill-prepared? Far from it. From the sound of it, you sound extremely capable to handle the challenges that stem from a rigorous academic environment.

You may resent your guidance counselor for not showing more support for whatever reason, and you are well within your rights to feel that way. But in college, you have to negotiate a lot on your own. No one is going to be there to tell you to go to class, to do your work, to be back at a certain time, etc. Being away from home requires a great deal of personal discipline and autonomy, and that is a challenge for many students, bright or not. I think, however, that the initiative that you demonstrated in high school will serve you well during your transition to college.

I had a very different high school experience. I went to an elite private school in a large metropolitan area. I was academically challenged...up until my senior year, when the material no longer piqued my interest. I became miserable. A long-term social misfit, I no longer had my precious academics to console me. As an INTJ, I was already intrinsically programmed to do everything myself, and was highly relieved to have competent and experienced guidance counselors (we had two) come to my aid.

I am glad that you got into a good school, and in a few short weeks you will graduate and it will all be over. I remember that I couldn't wait to leave my school and home and see the world. But then I found myself missing some of my favorite classes, teachers, and classmates, even the ones I despised (which I thought would NEVER happen--but it did). Going away to school made me appreciate home a bit more. So even though you feel like you live out in the middle of nowhere now, once you go to college, home will never feel the same, but you will always find yourself strangely glad to go back. Even if it's only for your pet.

[eternaltriangle]

I went to a bad Toronto public school (it ranked 621st out of about 700 on the literacy tests) because it had a Gifted program. It was a great decision. Our school was so bad that most kids just didn't show up - so nobody hassled the smart kids (who got to run the school). In general I am a strong supporter of Gifted Programs. In the regular stream I wasn't challenged, wasn't able to pursue my own interests, and any time I tried to, it only exacerbated the bullying I received from my peers.

I also benefited a lot from being forced to take Gifted classes in subjects I was bad at, like math. Without being placed in those classes against my will, coupled with the competitive pressure to match my peers, there are a lot of doors that would be closed to me now.

Random thing: It is not just bluster though, when people badmouth the American high school system. As a graduate of the Canadian system, and somebody who has graded students (at a decent state school*, albeit in a kind of crappy state - Indiana) coming out of the US system, I have not been impressed. Most students can't write essays, don't know how to proofread (damn you spell-check), and have no interest in understanding anything. The kinds of tests they like are ones where they just have to memorize a list... I wonder if this is the kind of student that standardized testing produces.

Then again, when you look at international standardized tests (eg. the PISA), the US still performs miserably, considering how much it spends per pupil.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

*Part of this may reflect that more people, as a proportion of the population, go to university in the US than in Canada (counting the Canadian college system as non-university). As a result, US universities will contain worse students, in addition to good (versus Canada, where only the good students are in university).

[bubbles]

The closest thing that my high school had to "gifted education" was AP and Honors classes. Students take those classes to inflate their GPA, and some teachers grade extra hard to change that mentality. I went to a public school that scored very low on standardized tests and was very underfunded because of budget cuts. As a taxpayer, I feel entitled to a good public education system. There are countries that spend just as much as the United States on public education yet their students outperform ours. The education system here is flawed and needs to be re-modeled after more successful ones. There needs to be stricter guidelines for hiring teachers. I've had AP Physics teachers who can't do calculus and math teachers who can't explain a topic well without regurgitating words from the textbook.

I'm still at a public school right now, except that I'm at a four-year university. I don't feel like my secondary education has prepared me well. I hardly studied at all in high school (except cramming for AP exams and finals) and here in college, everyone studies, especially the pre-meds (it seems like just about everyone here is an aspiring doctor...). I also don't feel as prepared as my peers, especially those who graduated from private schools or wealthy school districts.

[Homini Lupus]

I've been to a public school in Italy and I was fairly well prepared -but not for what I asked for. When you choose an "high school" (from 14 to 19 years old) there are different possibilities: technical, Humanistic or Scientific. I chose the latter, but because of the professors it was like going to the humanistics school without studying ancient greek. Fact is, teachers are there because of a public ranking based only on the years of service, so the ability of the professors can vary a lot.
Also, in our course we had a lot more of classes than the "normal" courses (30% or so) since we voluntarily chose the two foreign languages + IT + "more phisics" formula. This kept the number of classmate small; but we had nobody supposed to follow us and help in our studies: you have your course, your homework and eventually your classmates.

Another difference among Italy and the States is that here often private schools are for those students who don't care to study very much. There are also some excellency schools, but that's not the most common case.

About the school being public, I think it's quite important. Even if it's the taxpayer money you are using, it's really a public service since it creates (or should) a better society and gives everybody the basics to go on their own.

[Gabrielle]

There needs to be stricter guidelines for hiring teachers. I've had AP Physics teachers who can't do calculus and math teachers who can't explain a topic well without regurgitating words from the textbook.

I'm still at a public school right now, except that I'm at a four-year university. I don't feel like my secondary education has prepared me well. I hardly studied at all in high school (except cramming for AP exams and finals) and here in college, everyone studies, especially the pre-meds (it seems like just about everyone here is an aspiring doctor...). I also don't feel as prepared as my peers, especially those who graduated from private schools or wealthy school districts.

I never relied on the teachers to teach me anything. For me, learning is a personal activity and can be done by yourself. A teacher is someone who gives me the syllabus. The rest... is up to me.

I went to a private school, but I think in the end it's all the same - the amount of preparedness is really up to you. All the APs I took I never showed up for class, or was asleep, or was in the Student Council office getting yelled at because I screwed up on some charity event for the rich 'rents (I was the president, I got the steam from the teachers). I usually got a 5 on it.

Pre-meds study their butts off and meds get it even worse, I think. I'm sleeping every other day (I'm not joking) to maintain my grades. :S

[Danneh]

I'm extremely well prepared, but only because I fought for it. Living in North Carolina... well, it's just not the most educated state in the Country, and I meet a lot of resistance for being so young.

I forgot the name of the test we took in the third grade here, but it tests what level you are on, and even back then I was two grades ahead of the next student.

They wouldn't let me skip.

'It's too challenging, she's too young. She won't have any friends.'

As it were, the only friend I did have was the student behind me on the test, and that was because we competed for everything.

I took the SAT early(in middle school, which a fair many of our high achievers do) and scored better than most college bound seniors.

I still wasn't allowed to skip.

So I do work outside of school now, do classes during the summer, and sleep during the school day.

The only class I even work at is band, and that's because I play three instruments, and they do require a little work every now and then.

[integratedvelocity]

That sounds frighteningly similar. The only difference is that I was allowed to skip first grade. I think it was mostly because I would earn five or six prizes per day for reading, since a chapter counted as a book. I was costing the school district money!!! Really, I don't even remember much about it. I also ended up playing three instruments, saxophone in band, and violin and piano on my own. I don't know what I would have done with myself if I hadn't spent so much time doing music.

[SmileyMan]

Danish school system:
Folkeskole: Age 6/7- 16/17
Gymnasium - Late high school, though the level of knowledge at graduation is higher than that of the american system, or so I've read (3 kinds: Trading, generalised and technological): Age 16/17 - 19/20.

I envy the american treatment of smart pupils. Here in Denmark, you're limited to the level of the rest of the class the entire period you're in the Folkeskole (Folkschool), which is at least 10 years, no matter how smart you are. I guess this is one of negative effects of having a socialist government, "All are equal" etc. Folkschools for "gifted" have only just begun to pop up. The filtering of smart from stupid starts in the gymnasium where you can choose different levels of difficulty (A/B/C, A being best). All students must choose at least 2 A-level subjects apart from the obligatory ones, and you get the boot if you can't hang on.

I'd classify myself as an over-archiever as I often study futher and go more in-depth with things far beyond my teachers' curriculum, and I use the knowledge I gain from doing this to impress my teachers. Heh. :| I'm not looked upon as a nice person by my fellow classmates because of this.

I'm starting on the technological gymnasium with Mathematics A and Physics A, plus all the obligatory subjects, after summer, and I can't wait to really get starting, if you know what I mean. My dream is to study abroad in the States at MIT, and I've begun planning the typical things that international students need to have planned, because I'm really excited about it, though I try as much as possible to keep my hype down about it because of the fear of being rejected. :undecided:

[bubbles]

I never relied on the teachers to teach me anything. For me, learning is a personal activity and can be done by yourself. A teacher is someone who gives me the syllabus. The rest... is up to me.

I went to a private school, but I think in the end it's all the same - the amount of preparedness is really up to you. All the APs I took I never showed up for class, or was asleep, or was in the Student Council office getting yelled at because I screwed up on some charity event for the rich 'rents (I was the president, I got the steam from the teachers). I usually got a 5 on it.

Pre-meds study their butts off and meds get it even worse, I think. I'm sleeping every other day (I'm not joking) to maintain my grades. :S

It's nice to have the teacher explain things clearly when you don't understand it. It especially helps for complicated mathematical topics. But I can see what you mean. Ultimately, it is up to the student to make sure s/he actually learns. I didn't do all the homework in my AP classes because the teachers liked assigning busy work because AP classes were suppose to require much more work. I only did enough to learn the material and pass the AP exam with 4s and 5s, and I ended up with mostly B's in my AP classes.

How do you medical students study while sleep deprived? I can't concentrate without getting at least 6 hours of sleep per night.

[Gabrielle]

I'm used to excessive concentration while being sleep-deprived. But you will rarely see me outside the room, because I'm usually sleeping if I have free time. Also, my study group consists of syllabus, red bull/caffeine pills, and my notes. So you get what I do...

[TeleportThis]

I went to a very small rural public school. There were about 80 students per grade and it was the largest high school in the county. There had been no gifted education for several years by the time I attended. The only APs left were Calc AB, US History, Env. Science, Bio., and Psych.

The first three sentences in this paragraph were the same for me. We; however, did not have the option of taking AP courses until my senior year. Our AP classes were given online and did not have an actual teacher like most schools though. I wouldn't say my high school was amazing by any means, but I do believe that the opportunity to learn is there, and even if you aren't challenged by the classwork, that doesn't mean you can't take it farther on your own. Our school was pretty lucky to have really good teachers for the upper level math and science (chemistry and physics) classes though.


Having to do everything yourself isn't such a bad thing. No one is going to hold your hand in college and if you've already had experience in a student centric environment (like colleges are), you are going to be one up on many of your peers. I was a TA for a freshman engineering class and there are several kids that come from small towns that didn't have to try in high school to get good grades and thought they were smart who suddenly find out after coming to college that they aren't that smart after all and kind of freak out. All lot of times they even end up dropping out, even though they probably could have made it if they were willing to work harder.

[Sylvanus]

I went to a publik school, better than most, but I still was not challenged at all. I was more than prepared for college, but that was more my doing than anything my K-12 years ever did for me. The American school system sucks bad, it has steadily degraded year after year.

Here are some interesting articles an American Edukayshun:

Failing our Geniuses (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.)

...
To some extent, complacency is built into the system. American schools spend more than $8 billion a year educating the mentally retarded. Spending on the gifted isn't even tabulated in some states, but by the most generous calculation, we spend no more than $800 million on gifted programs. But it can't make sense to spend 10 times as much to try to bring low-achieving students to mere proficiency as we do to nurture those with the greatest potential.

We take for granted that those with IQs at least three standard deviations below the mean (those who score 55 or lower on IQ tests) require "special" education. But students with IQs that are at least three standard deviations above the mean (145 or higher) often have just as much trouble interacting with average kids and learning at an average pace. Shouldn't we do something special for them as well? True, these are IQs at the extremes. Of the 62 million school-age kids in the U.S., only about 62,000 have IQs above 145. (A similar number have IQs below 55.) That's a small number, but they appear in every demographic, in every community. What to do with them? Squandered potential is always unfortunate, but presumably it is these powerful young minds that, if nourished, could one day cure leukemia or stop global warming or become the next James Joyce--or at least J.K. Rowling.
...


Cognitive Child Abuse (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.)

The test results are in: America's children are flunking math. In 1996 American high school seniors finished close to the bottom on an international mathematics test. At the end of last year, American eighth-graders ranked below those of Malaysia, Bulgaria, and Latvia.

As educators scramble to explain America's math meltdown--as the Bush administration urges more "accountability" and a National Research Council study recommends better "training"--few are willing to look at the fundamental cause: the new, "whole-math" method for teaching.

Inspired by a strain of progressive-education theory called "constructivism," whole-math proponents claim that all knowledge--including mathematical knowledge--is arbitrarily constructed. They reject the idea that there are objectively demonstrable right and wrong answers, and that, consequently, there are basic skills that students must be taught. Instead, the advocates of whole math believe that each student should invent his or her own math "strategies" by using a "guess-and-check" approach. They create an inability to think beyond immediate concretes.
...
Mathematics is like any other field. To master it, one must acquire basic knowledge before proceeding to more advanced stages. Proficiency in math requires that grade-school children learn the standard algorithms (i.e., the methods for addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division) and the four forms of numbers (i.e., integers, fractions, decimals, and percents). This forms the foundation upon which higher and higher levels of knowledge can then be built.

The controversy surrounding whole math is not simply about how children are taught to deal with numbers. If we undermine the capacity of our children to learn mathematics, we undercut their ability to think. More and more, our schools are turning out students whose capacity to reason has atrophied. Students who have not learned how to add and divide are also unable to perform the more demanding cognitive tasks of understanding concepts like "justice" or "truth" or "logic." America's children are being turned into mindless drones, who will soon be unable to distinguish freedom from tyranny....

[Uytuun]

Hmm, I put public school even though I didn't go to a state school, but to a Catholic school...both varieties are open to all pupils and do not require you to pay tuition fees. The level of education and the courses are fairly similar. I would say that the Catholic schools have a slightly better reputation, however. In secondary school I took the Latin (1jr) Latin-Greek (1jr) and Latin-Modern Languages (4jrs) modules. Intellectually it's been ok, and anyway, I could've done it on my own as well. The thing that I find could have been better is preparing me for the competitive world that's out there if you have larger-than-average ambitions. Great intellect alone won't do, you need to understand the value of networking, of taking on extra-curricular activities (!), of grades etc.

Compared to the US, our school system is just wonderful. I think it is in fact average to good. Never a challenge to me, but that allowed me to pursue other interests. It's a good thing that teens are still allowed some play time, I think.

[Merle]

I had an extremely varied school career - my dad works in international development so we moved around the world quite alot.
While we were in the UK I attended state schools - Catholic primary school ages 6-8, and 11, Catholic secondary school - ages 11-13, and a Grammar school (state but selective) ages 16-18.

While in other countries I attended private schools that taught the UK or an international curriculum: ages 4-6 in Malawi, an international school; ages 8-11 in Fiji, an international school, and ages 13-16 in Kenya, UK system.

Like Uytuun, I think our state system is pretty damn good, as far as I can see the biggest differences between state and private schools here are down to money and resources - more money in private schools means smaller class sizes, greater student/teacher contact time, and more sports facilities/provision for extra curriculars. I don't think the actual quality of the teaching is any better, just that each pupil gets more attention.
I would say I enjoyed my time at my school in Kenya the most, but the attainment level of the students there was far below that of my state grammar school in England. However, the tiny class sizes, and opportunities for experimentation within the curriculum - ie conducting science and geography research in Safari parks etc made the learning very interesting, and so I always felt stimulated.

[suzyk]

I go to a normal, public high-school, which is pretty specialized in the computer/tech classes. Too bad I'm no good at it. I've never been in a gifted program, but I've been dubbed as a 'special needs child' and they put me in ESL in the 3rd grade. But I loved reading and I was exceptionally good at writing, so they took me out. Right now, I'm not that great at math, science or any of that, and my English teacher doesn't find me interesting, so I'm passing with a few 80's-70's. I don't care, I'll just go to some college and get a degree. I think my school is pretty good.

[Shadow]

I'm going to the largest public high school in South Australia, in the gifted program (called IGNITE. It stands for something.) The program has two home groups, the Ignite home group and co-ignite home group. Basically, it compresses three years of maths, english and science into two years, makes us take another year of language and lets us take up year 11 subjects in year 10 if we want to/think we can.

But honestly, some of the kids in my home group still act like they're 10 years old, the only difference is that now they can shout louder and are bigger.

[Pinkie]

I went to a large state primary school and then a large state grammar school (England) and I'd say my education was okay, but lacking slightly in some areas. For instance, as soon as we arrived at uni the first thing we got was a lesson in essay structure and style, and everything in it was new to most of us. But the leap in terms of knowledge and effort required wasn't too massive for me, so I certainly don't feel failed by my education.

[acyckowski]

I attended elementary school in the parochial system, which in the U.S. is private. I then went to an incredibly good private HS, also Catholic. My education through ES was adequate (gifted Math was the only program available, but I was allowed to skip a grade), but the demanding nature of my high school made it a tremendous education, even for the so-so students.

I'm from a small but population dense state (Delaware), so the kids at the top academically (and athletically) knew who their "rivals" were. The best programs for the top-tier kids were found at the public schools, but the hitch was that you had to be self-motivated and pretty oblivious to all the craziness going on around you. For me, I was better off at an academically focused, tightly-controlled school: if things hadn't been hard, I wouldn't have bothered.

My children are now in public schools (we had no practical alternative) and it seems to me that U.S. public schools are fully resourced and prepared to deal with the "abnormal" students, whether they be gifted, dense, or somehow disordered. Normal students get marginalized. That would seem to be the cause of the overall lack of quality, and poor test scores, of U.S. students: if an average kid gets an average grade, nobody tries to push them harder.

[robolizard55]

I hopped around quite a bit early on. In short order I attended a very small private academy, then a catholic school, then public school (1st-5th grades, skipped 'kindergarten') before settling to a private school from 6-12. I found the small and diverse student body to be well suited to me. The school was mostly comprised of rich smart kids, rich behavior problem kids, and scholarship smart kids. It actually worked harmoniously and was not 'cliquey' at all. Overall it was a special place that seemed to find the right balance for about 15-20 years.

[Sylvanus]

My children are now in public schools (we had no practical alternative) and it seems to me that U.S. public schools are fully resourced and prepared to deal with the "abnormal" students, whether they be gifted, dense, or somehow disordered. Normal students get marginalized. That would seem to be the cause of the overall lack of quality, and poor test scores, of U.S. students: if an average kid gets an average grade, nobody tries to push them harder.

Well their school certainly seems to be the exception. I hope they do well.

[merid]

In England we have Grammar Schools as well. Of which I attended. You have to take the 11+ to get in, so obviously everyone was going from the same benchmark.

All of the classes after the first year were streamlined into sets, so I guess it was gifted. I find with gifted classes that the competition is that much more intense, it does tend to alienate you against the rest of the world. But I am an INTJ, so I don't care.

[acyckowski]

Well their school certainly seems to be the exception. I hope they do well.

It seems to be generally true, however my observations have been limited to the East Coast of the U.S.: "Megalopolis" and the surrounding countryside.





acyckowski added to this post, 1 minutes and 9 seconds later...


All of the classes after the first year were streamlined into sets, so I guess it was gifted. I find with gifted classes that the competition is that much more intense, it does tend to alienate you against the rest of the world. But I am an INTJ, so I don't care.

Yeah, you didn't need anbody else's help to alienate you.