The New York Times profiled a school for highly gifted students in Nevada today. According to the banner on their website, Davidson Academy serves “profoundly gifted” students. The only concern I have about pushing gifted children through school so that they graduate early is that it forces them to become little adults. While they may have a vast intellect, they do not have the social and emotional skill sets of adults. The movie Little Man Tate, directed by Jodie Foster, explored this issue. In my opinion, what we need to do is create good programs for gifted students that allow them to stay in the same grade level as their peers.

I am certified to teach gifted students. I was also considered gifted in school, though I was not profoundly gifted, and to be honest, my IQ puts me in the moderately gifted range. I was enrolled in gifted classes beginning in 5th grade. I opted out of gifted education in the 10th grade. My gifted education classes in the 1980’s were kind of joke. I went about once a week. I was pulled out of other regular instruction classes, which meant I missed instruction. I mostly did brain teasers and logic problems. While those were fun, I was never really sure what I was supposed to be getting out of the experience. I did one project in which I researched Susan B. Anthony and created a display box biography of her life. That was fun. Once I got to high school, my gifted instruction centered more around subject matter. I was in what they called Honors English, but that was my only gifted course. When I moved to California, my school records were apparently lost. My school in Anaheim wanted me to re-take the gifted test. I was scared to do so, because qualifying for gifted education in 5th grade was very different from 9th grade. My peers were really smart. I was afraid it was a mistake — the fact that I was in gifted education at all. I decided not to take the test, and I was required to drop into regular college prep classes. I regret that stupid mistake to this day — I should have taken that test, continued gifted education, and taken AP classes. Gifted education in high school, at least my experience with teaching it, is so different from elementary and middle school. I hope things have changed since my days as a student.

When I was taking my certification courses, I recall we had a discussion in class about a statement made by our textbook’s author that teachers of gifted students ought to be gifted themselves. I really don’t think that is out of line. Gifted students require some level of understanding, some level of thinking like them in order to challenge them. One teacher disagreed with that statement, and our “professor” agreed with her (he was actually a vice-superintendent of a local school system, so I’m not sure what his actual degree was). I didn’t say what I thought. I read the room and decided my opinion was unpopular.

The article mentions that “Susan Aspey, a spokeswoman for the Department of Education, said the ‘vast majority’ of federal spending for children in kindergarten through 12th grade was for the neediest children.” Our position in this society is that if you are gifted, you have everything you need, so we don’t need to devote resources to you. This is true emotionally and socially, too. We assume gifted students are OK because they are gifted. A study cited in the article notes we don’t spend enough money on gifted students:

Nancy Green, executive director of the National Association for Gifted Children, said that state and local efforts were admirable but that their inconsistency reflected lost opportunities. A new survey by her association found that among 39 states that responded, 24 spent as much as $10 million on programs for gifted children but 7 spent less than $1 million and 8 spent nothing.

Green continued: “For a nation, I’m not sure why we value equity over excellence. All kids are entitled to an appropriate education for their ability, not just those we’re teaching to a minimum standard.”

Have you by any chance read the short story “Harrison Bergeron” by Kurt Vonnegut? In a sense, what we are doing with gifted education is handicapping gifted students as much as the Handicapper General’s office handicapped any individuals who showed excellence in any area. At one time, gifted students were considered “exceptional children” in the same way as special education students were considered “exceptional” — meaning “different from the norm.” I’m sure someone can correct me if I’m wrong, but I learned in my Exceptional Children course in college (back in 1992 or 1993) that the conventional wisdom was to remove gifted students from underneath the umbrella of exceptional education, although I see the CEC still includes gifted education as part of its agenda. In some ways, this harmed gifted education, because dollars earmarked for exceptional students no longer went into gifted education.

Because our gifted kids are smart, we assume that they will be fine if we focus on students who are not gifted. We assume those other students need us more, while gifted students will get by on their own. All of our students need us.

Some gifted education resources:

• National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented
• Hoagies’ Gifted Education Page
• Neag Center for Gifted Education and Talent Development
• A Glossary of Gifted Education

Wait a second — according to the Seattle Times, Washington students were considered sophomores if they were in their second year of high school, even if they hadn’t earned enough credits to “pass” their freshman year?

Everyone says Georgia’s backwards, but goodness knows you have had to pass five out of six ninth grade classes to move up to tenth grade in Georgia for as long as I can remember. How is it that Washington just figured out this might be a good policy, and why did it take a concern over test scores to effect this change? No wonder “[s]ome still think if they complete four years and are taking senior classes with friends, they’re going to be able to walk at graduation, when that’s not true.”

Two hot stories in education news right now involve the ongoing debate over teaching intelligent design in the classroom and school prayer. I am passionate about the issue of separation of church and state with regard to public schools for several reasons. As a parent, I do not want schools indoctrinating my child with religious beliefs that run counter to what I, as her parent, want to teach her. In this country, I am free to practice religion (or not) as I choose, and every religion and various denomination under each religion represents very different ideas. Who gets to choose what is “right”? I am also a proponent of separation of church and state because I think it would be bad for churches. I believe this is what Jesus’ teaching means: “Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s.” Finally, as a teacher, I would feel uncomfortable supporting religion in public schools, knowing full well that the wide array of religious beliefs of my students.

I currently teach at a private Jewish high school, and it does not bother me at all to support Judaism within the context of my job, because I think it is clearly understood that my students attend a religious institution — their education is not separate from their religion. They have told me some very interesting stories about public school teachers they have encountered. One student said that she had a teacher in the 5th grade who assigned her a seat near the teacher’s desk. Right in front of my student’s desk, on her own desk, the teacher placed a copy of the New Testament. She offered to loan it to the student at any time. She also offered to loan my student her copies of the Left Behind series of Christian fiction by Jerry Jenkins and Tim LaHaye. I find the behavior of this teacher reprehensible. Who is she to try to undermine the religious teachings in the home of my student? How might she feel if someone did something similar to her daughter — for example, tried to pass her a copy of the Qu’ran?

As a high school student in marching band, our band held hands and recited the Lord’s Prayer before football games. Our band director was not involved. He passively watched on as we did this. In fact, it was in this circle that I learned the Lord’s Prayer, as my family did not go to church. However, I will say I felt awkward and pressured in that situation. I felt uncomfortable. It seems, though, that my director was following the letter and spirit of the decision made in Engel v. Vitale.

I was actually confronted with a dilemma involving school prayer this week when my students watched The Crucible. At the end of Nicholas Hytner’s movie, John Proctor, Rebecca Nurse, and Martha Corey recite the Lord’s Prayer. In the discussion following the movie, my students, unfamiliar with the New Testament, asked what it was. I told them. One remarked that it sounded kind of like a Psalm. Then another asked me why they would recite it at that time. I explained that it was similar to the Jewish prayer known as the Shema (“Hear O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is One.”) In fact, I explained, I had read account of Holocaust victims reciting the Shema in much the same circumstances as the three accused witches recited the Lord’s Prayer. I indicated that the Lord’s Prayer had the same prominence for Christians as the Shema did for Jews. Then a student asked if I knew it. I replied that I did. She requested that I recite it. I thought for a second, decided that it would not constitute a violation of my principals, my school’s principles, or my students’ rights, because they were more or less asking not to be taught Christianity, but to hear the Prayer one more time for their own analysis of my claims that it was similar to the Shema, and I recited it. As an English teacher, I am often called upon to explain Biblical allusions to my students. I think it can be done in such a way as to prevent any discomfort or violation of my students’ rights.

There was a time in my life when I was very active in church. I listened to religious radio a great deal at that time. One of the pervasive fears of many of the hosts of the shows on that station was the spread of Secular Humanism. It was out of this fear that the Religious Right’s movement toward homeschooling began to pick up steam. The idea was that our schools were a bastion of Secular Humanism, and if one wanted to ensure their child was brought up with the proper beliefs and morals, it was incumbent upon the parent to shield their child(ren) from those influences, whether that took the form of homeschooling or private Christian schooling. In our country, parents are free to make this decision. I think it is important that parents have the freedom to choose how to educate their child in their religion (or lack thereof). There are countries where state religion and religious freedom exist in tandem. However, there are also countries with dogmatic state religions which actively encourage the obliteration of conflicting religious beliefs and harm those who have divergent religions.

I feel passionately that students should not have to be confronted with the pressure to pray in school or be taught intelligent design in public schools. Because I feel this way, many have asked me about my own religious beliefs. I actually do believe in intelligent design (or, to be more precise, theistic evolution), and I am a Christian who prays. However, I also believe firmly that these two values are religious values, and in choosing to pass these values on to my children, I would not wish her school to be involved.