[Ohiogift] Labelling the gifted

Wed Apr 16 22:00:28 EDT 2014

So we'd rather have the preferred term or right definition than better
opportunities  for children at school?  Anything else upsets our delicate
sensibilities?

I'm sorry. That sounds sort of wimpy and just sad.
 On Apr 16, 2014 9:50 PM, "Schultz, Robert" <Robert.Schultz at utoledo.edu>
wrote:

>  A quick “chime in” from Northwest Ohio…..
>
>  It is pretty hysterical (and sad, infuriating and the like) that a
> position such as that proposed by the authors is even being considered.
> With the redefinition of gifted and emphasis on talent development, the
> field (well, some people in it, that is) are attempting to mainstream on
> academics and performance. This aligns well with measurement and
> accountability, but completely misses the mark for the vast majority of
> gifted kids. Making kids fit the parameters of school has never worked for
> the gifted population. It needs to be the schools who must meet the needs
> of the kids.
>
>  There are many of us who know and firmly provide the social/emotional
> needs emphasis that is the grounding to our field, and the children (and
> families) that comprise our charge. Keep advocating and supporting the kids
> in (and out of) the classroom. Keep working to point out where “the emperor
> has no clothes”; and, the fallacies in the statements made by people who
> have no experience working with the gifted.
>
>  And, remember, gifted is who you are—you cannot change it or hide it.
> Talented is what you can do—and you can decide to show it or not.
>
>  Relying on performance as the indicator of giftedness (or a rationale
> for developing talent) is as myopic as expecting accountability testing to
> fix education….
>
>  Keep up the good work!! For kids….
>
>  Bob
>   Robert A. Schultz, Ph.D.
> Gifted Education & Curriculum Studies
>
> Professor
> The University of Toledo
> 2801 W. Bancroft St.
> 2000 Z Gillham Hall
> Mailstop 924
>
> Toledo, OH  43606
>
>  (419) 530-2469
> (419) 530-2466 FAX
> robert.schultz at utoledo.edu
>
>
>  *See my homepage at:*
> homepages.utoledo.edu/rschult/home.html
> *and visit www.giftedkidspeak.com <http://www.giftedkidspeak.com/>*
>
>   What I look forward to is continued immaturity, followed by death.
>                                                   —Dave Barry
>
>  On Apr 16, 2014, at 9:22 PM, Colleen Grady <cdg.gradyllc at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>  I don't mean to be indelicate, but my concern here is not for adults or
> institutions so I don't care what label is used or even if a label is
> used.
>
>  No disrespect to NAGC, but the idea of potentially changing an
> organization's name as problematic is laughable.
>
> I care about what happens for these children. If ditching the term
> "gifted" (or screaming like a chicken on Capitol Square at high noon)
> improved opportunities for gifted children I would do it in a heartbeat.
> It's just not that important. Really, it's not.
>
>  And having lived through the trials, tribulations and fun of having one
> of those highly gifted children (and living to tell the tale) I I know all
> too well the social and emotional challenges for these kids and their
> families. Knowing all that I know I would give my eye teeth to just having
> these children respected as individuals and have their academic and
> instructional needs of these students recognized and met. That's plenty and
> so much more than what we have now. Expecting the school to be everything
> for everyone is unrealistic and quite frankly weakens advocacy efforts.
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 8:54 PM, <Ms118rbts at aol.com> wrote:
>
>>  Susan,
>> Your question, "If we throw away the word, then what is the National
>> Association for Gifted Children, in which all of these authors are major
>> players, all about?" is right on.
>> We wonder why we still keep fighting the same old battles with so little
>> forward progress.  With third grade guarantee and other hoops to jump
>> through, students who have exceptional ability are often neglected,
>> especially when district finances are really tight. In many cases,  having
>> the " gifted" label is the only thing that gets students anything
>> approaching rigorous - let alone beyond grade level instruction and endless
>> practice at things the student already understands.
>>  It is hard to make progress when some in the field seem to be giving
>> those who do not believe in gifted education ammunition like this article!
>> Margaret, I love your analogy!
>> Sally
>>
>>
>>
>>  In a message dated 4/16/2014 8:18:11 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
>> susanrakow at earthlink.net writes:
>>
>> I don't agree either because it presumes that giftedness is only about
>> academic intervention and school instruction and disregards, particularly
>> among the most highly gifted, the social and emotional aspects of
>> experiencing the world through a gifted mind and heart. Lots of words have
>> multiple connotations and sometimes the word "gifted" has baggage...but so
>> does autistic or Asperger's or diabetic or artist and many others. And the
>> fact is, that some children DO have abilities that others don't, just as
>> some children DO have disabilities that others don't.
>>
>> If we throw away the word, then what is the National Association for
>> Gifted Children, in which all of these authors are major players, all about?
>> Susan
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> >From: Margaret DeLacy <margaretdelacy at comcast.net>
>> >Sent: Apr 16, 2014 8:07 PM
>> >To: OATAG at yahoogroups.com, "XL-PDX at yahoogroups.com" <
>> XL-PDX at yahoogroups.com>, Tagfam at listserv.icors.org,
>> Ohiogift at lists.service.ohio-state.edu
>> >Subject: [Ohiogift] Labelling the gifted
>> >
>> >
>> http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2014/04/16/28peters_ep.h33.html?cmp=ENL-EU-NEWS1
>> >
>> >Commentary
>> >Gifted Ed. Is Crucial, But the Label Isn't
>> >By Scott J. Peters, Scott Barry Kaufman, Michael S. Matthews, Matthew T.
>> McBee, D. Betsy McCoach
>> >
>> >"But how does the label of "gifted" help teachers and administrators
>> determine the appropriate programming for students? In our view, the term
>> is not only unhelpful, but actually harmful to the interests of bright
>> students. "Gifted" is an educationally nondescript concept, yet it also
>> connotes an endowment that some students receive while others do not.
>> Moreover, the term seems to suggest that high academic performance is a
>> permanent quality, both due to chance and applicable in all domains.
>> >
>> >The truth is that "giftedness" is irrelevant to K-12 educational
>> decisions. What is relevant is whether the instruction a child receives is
>> sufficiently rigorous to challenge that child. When that is not the case,
>> there are many potential causes."
>> >
>> >Margaret comments:
>> >
>> >I disagree with this.  I think the authors are insensitive to the
>> realities of a school environment where time and energy are at a premium.
>> These constraints make it exceedingly unlikely that a child will have
>> access to "rigorous" instruction without a formal procedure for identifying
>> the students who are likely to need significant interventions.
>> >
>> >Suppose I went to a nursery and said "one of my plants is failing to
>> thrive.  What should I do?"
>> >
>> >The nursery worker says, "what plant is it?"
>> >
>> >I say, "I don't know.  I don't believe in labelling my plants."
>> >
>> >The nursery isn't going to send someone out to my home to see what plant
>> it is.  I don't have the time to try to figure it out.  So the plant
>> doesn't get what it needs.
>> >
>> >Labels are never perfect.  They are always probabilistic.  Labels can be
>> switched or wrong.  But a good label would tell a knowledgeable person what
>> kind of plant I probably have, how it fits in a taxonomy of plants, and
>> what sorts of issues it might have.  For example, there are tens of
>> thousands of species of rhododendrons.  But even if all we know is that the
>> plant is a rhododendron at least that would also mean it probably needs
>> acid soil. At least we would know to check for that issue.
>> >
>> >Margaret
>> >
>> >
>> >_______________________________________________
>> >Ohiogift mailing list
>> >Ohiogift at lists.service.ohio-state.edu
>> >https://lists.service.ohio-state.edu/mailman/listinfo/ohiogift
>>
>>
>> Susan R. Rakow, Ph.D.
>> Clinical Associate Professor, Director of Graduate Program in Gifted
>> Education
>> Department of Curriculum and Foundations
>> Cleveland State University
>> 2485 Euclid Ave., EB374
>> Cleveland, OH 44115-2214
>> 216-523-7296
>> s.rakow at csuohio.edu
>>
>> “Modern cynics and skeptics see no harm in paying those to whom they
>> entrust the minds of their children a smaller wage than is paid to those to
>> whom they entrust the care of their plumbing.” -John F. Kennedy
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ohiogift mailing list
>> Ohiogift at lists.service.ohio-state.edu
>> https://lists.service.ohio-state.edu/mailman/listinfo/ohiogift
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ohiogift mailing list
>> Ohiogift at lists.service.ohio-state.edu
>> https://lists.service.ohio-state.edu/mailman/listinfo/ohiogift
>>
>>
>    _______________________________________________
> Ohiogift mailing list
> Ohiogift at lists.service.ohio-state.edu
> https://lists.service.ohio-state.edu/mailman/listinfo/ohiogift
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osu.edu/pipermail/ohiogift/attachments/20140416/b7145ad2/attachment.html>