Saturday, March 25, 2000
Gifted, sure - but what do you do next?
BY KRISTA RAMSEY
The Cincinnati Enquirer
The state of Ohio is conducting an interesting little head-counting of its own, with its own set of controversies.
A new state law requires school districts to be clear, consistent and quantitative about identifying gifted students. It says the process must start as soon as children enter kindergarten.
It even tells school districts which set of tests they must choose from, and, to some extent, the procedures they must use to sort out high-ability students.
No more loosey-goosey.
No more simple teacher recommendation.
No more kids in gifted programs because their parents think they belong there. From now on, the state wants children to hit a precise number on a precise test. And it wants to know that a child who's considered gifted in Toledo would also be gifted in Cincinnati.
To make things even more interesting, the state wants to know specifically where the child's gifts lie.
Until now, most children showed up in gifted programs because they scored well in language arts and math. Now subtests may show that a child is gifted in social studies, for example, or in science — and perhaps only in those areas.
Its heavy emphasis on testing — on hitting the “perfect” score — would appear to shrink the number of gifted students, but the subtesting will probably result in more students being identified as gifted.
Besides widening the definition of giftedness, the new legislation gives Ohio students more opportunities to show that they are gifted.
In the past, most school districts offered a single chance each year to test into a gifted program. Now “bubble kids” — those whose scores were just a few points below the magic number — can be tested again. If they still don't make the score, they can be tested a third time at their parents' request.
Clearly, one possible result of the legislation is that a good many Ohio schoolchildren could spend a good deal more time being tested. What's the loss? Most likely, a little thing called direct instruction.
But certainly the question that looms over all of this is: So what will the state do with its numbers? The biggest loophole in the new legislation is that, while school districts have a mandate to identify gifted students, they still have no mandate to serve them.
Never have had.
And this is the part of the new legislation that ultimately will put state legislators — not students or teachers — to the test.
Identifying gifted children isn't cheap. Serving them can be extremely costly.
The new legislation carefully “suggests” that gifted services could include curriculum tailored to the child, special gifted classrooms, more advanced placement, independent study, mentoring relationships, even magnet schools.
Hey, thanks for the suggestion.
Years of research on gifted education show that high-ability children need something different. It may be faster, deeper, wider or more individualized than regular instruction, but it clearly is not just the same as everybody else with a little bit extra.
State legislatures must come out of this census with not only a clearer understanding of who gifted children are, but a true appreciation for their needs.
In the best of all worlds, lawmakers will see that serving gifted children well requires extra support for the classroom teacher and more opportunities for bright kids to move at their own pace and learn in their own way.
Independent study? Individualized curriculum? Bring 'em on.
But bring on some money to pay for the options. Having smart kids in our state is one reason to celebrate; serving them well is quite another.
Krista Ramsey's column appears on Saturdays. Write her at 312 Elm Street, Cincinnati, OH 45202 or fax at 768-8340.
