G.a.t.e.

[Iamcanadian28]

The real problem are GATE programs that are anything but talented themselves. I was put in a program that did very little, but my oldest daughter went into one that was absolutely horrible.

She was tested and placed in first grade because she was becoming a disruption -- as she thought everyone should be done with their work and available to talk if she was done. Things went well for the first several years, but then a staff change put a new teacher in charge of the GATE program. He did a great unit on WWII -- as long as you think it OK that he was teaching that Roosevelt died after the end of the war and the Japanese surrendered before the Germans. She called him on it and I got to spend three different afternoons in the Principals office explaining that the teacher was an idiot and had no place teaching a gifted class.

From there she went to a high school with NO GATE program at all. Fortunately, she had high enough scores to qualify to take the ACT in 5th grade and get into the Center for Talent Development at Northwestern. Hauling her up there was a pain in the ass pretty much every Saturday for classes, but it was well worth it. Also was fortunate in that there were a few teachers at the high school that I knew who recognized her for what she was and helped me push the right buttons and pull the right strings to make things work well for her.

And before you say put her in private school, I was in a fairly remote area and there weren't any better options. We made the best of what we had.

Oddly enough, after all of this, now she wants to be a teacher -- she figures she couldn't do any worse than many she has come across as a student

Teachers don't like to be corrected in front of their entire class. I got into trouble for that all the time.

 

[amicus]

OMG! I think the Earth moved!

 

[Emperor_Nero]

Teachers don't like to be corrected in front of their entire class. I got into trouble for that all the time.

She didn't do it in front of the class ... she mentioned it one-on-one at the end. This teacher just didn't like to be corrected -- he wasn't very happy when I (who minored in U.S. History and wrote three published essays on WWII) corrected him, alone or in front of the principal. He relented before I did it in front of the Board of Education

 

[Guest]

OMG! I think the Earth moved!

Was it good for you, too?

 

[JagFarlane]

Hmmmm, lets see. I went to two different high schools, saw two different things.

My first high school was quite a bit larger than my second high school. As such, they had to funding to, as early as middle school to set things up differently. They had 5 different levels of classes, Basic Skills, forget name, regular, academic, and honors. In our school, in 3rd grade, the "gifted" students were pulled aside and offered to go to after school classes [so that they didn't interfere with regular schooling and subjects like art]. I forget why I didn't go, but anyways, my school decided my 8th grade year to place me in honors level. This, I pretty much continued up until my junior year, when I transferred. There, they didn't have honors classes, it was regular classes and AP classes. I was also further ahead than other classmates due to my previous school. I couldn't take AP physics so went through a regular class of that. Waited till my senior year to take AP US History II, etc etc.

Anyways, having seen the side of being able to attend gifted classes vs not, I can say it was much more beneficial for me to attend gifted classes. The teachers I worked with knew to push harder, expected more, but were often more willing to give their own time up to help. Add to that, as was referred to before, I felt I belonged more. When we were placed in group projects, it wasn't all about making the smart kid work, which does happen. Everybody had something to contribute. And, it gave me confidence to pursue my current career.

I am a full believer that No Child Left Behind hurts a lot more than it could ever help. Standardized testing is never the solution, because you get some otherwise intelligent people, that are horrible test-takers. But there are so many standardized tests, I got to witness firsthand as teachers struggled with their lesson plans just to be able to have time to teach a test. CAT tests in elementary/middle school, then in NJ the HSPT [High School Proficiency Test] in 11th grade. Add to that the Pre-SAT, then the SAT or ACT. Most of these tests have done nothing but take away from teachers and students. What isn't so shown is the backlash slowly coming. Take the SAT/ACT, there are colleges that no longer even want to see those tests [Bates University and University of California, Berkley for example].

G.A.T.E classes offer an outlet for a lot of these students, and can sometimes be the difference between a kid dropping out and a kid graduating. One student I knew, was a huge troublemaker, often in the principals office, etc etc, till the GATE teacher took note of him, asked to bring him into the program, lo and behold the kid was a genius. He was merely bored and thus got in trouble as he let out his energy in other ways.

What really concerns me though, is kids being allowed to keep progressing when they really shouldn't. When I was in DEP [Delayed Entry Program for the military], my recruiter used to confide in me, the horror of the ASVAB scores they would see. The bare minimal score to enter the Army is a 30, the Navy is a 34. The ASVAB really is a very basic test. Yet, he would see people, that even though they had graduated high school, were scoring 19's, 9's, even 5's on the test. Thats the result of NCLB, people whom can not function in society. And is it to say Basic Skills students can't? Hell no, one of my best friends was a Basic student...he's now wrapping up his Masters from Penn State and works for Vanguard as a computer security specialist. But then again, thats just because he learned slower.

One other thing to note, about the elitism claim. In all truth, my group of friends in my second high school, were most AP level students, but we made friends with people of all types, Basic Skills or not. Hell my first gf was a Basic student -shrugs- We, in all honesty, were more tolerant of others because we'd all been teased and abused by the "normal" students.

 

[Iamcanadian28]

She didn't do it in front of the class ... she mentioned it one-on-one at the end. This teacher just didn't like to be corrected -- he wasn't very happy when I (who minored in U.S. History and wrote three published essays on WWII) corrected him, alone or in front of the principal. He relented before I did it in front of the Board of Education

I didn't have that level of self-control, if I saw an error I wanted it corrected right away. Staffing is certainly an issue in all school systems. Their is a vast array of teacher quality levels. The funny thing is, everybdy knows who the good and bad ones are, but nothing ever happens about it that I've ever seen.

 

[Guest]

She didn't do it in front of the class ... she mentioned it one-on-one at the end. This teacher just didn't like to be corrected -- he wasn't very happy when I (who minored in U.S. History and wrote three published essays on WWII) corrected him, alone or in front of the principal. He relented before I did it in front of the Board of Education

What an unprofessional ass that teacher was. Or is.

Good for you for pushing matters.

 

[rgraham666]

Eh, who are you kidding, friend? You're only in favor of individualism as long as they are individuals just like you.

 

[Emperor_Nero]

I didn't have that level of self-control, if I saw an error I wanted it corrected right away. Staffing is certainly an issue in all school systems. Their is a vast array of teacher quality levels. The funny thing is, everybdy knows who the good and bad ones are, but nothing ever happens about it that I've ever seen.

Normally, she probably would have too ... she was so shocked by this level of (I dare call it) stupidity, she figured it just had to be some kind of mix up in presentation. It took until the end of class before it finally started to soak in that this is what he was actually trying to teach them.

 

[Emperor_Nero]

What an unprofessional ass that teacher was. Or is.

Good for you for pushing matters.

The sad part is that it's IS ... he's now got tenure -- and is still in charge of that poor little school's GATE program

 

[Guest]

The sad part is that it's IS ... he's now got tenure -- and is still in charge of that poor little school's GATE program

Documentation.

I am partially responsible (ahem) for the removal of a very bad teacher from our building this past May.

The man was amazingly unprofessional. Confused, had a tendency to lie when confronted on the facts, held grudges for months when he felt he was wronged, and his teaching skills were - not in existence. The thought was that perhaps he had a drug or alcohol problem, because he was very inconsistent with his moods and job quality.

Apparently they'd had many parental complaints but no one would ever push the issue. The principal, who inherited the man when she took her job, had been trying to build a case to get the person gone.

With my daughter in his class (for one week - this was in the middle of the year and there was a scheduling problem) I brought concerns to the principal, documented them, and pushed the issue. He finally blew it when he punished my daughter by dropping her grade from an A to a C. Then he lectured my child about how if she had concerns about him that she needed to talk to him, not her parent talking to the principal. My daughter is going - what? You're creepy, stay away from me! (Well, she told me she thought that, anyway.)

But that did it. Principal was very involved, I pulled her from his class immediately, we finished out the year. And wonder of wonders, he's gone.

And there was much rejoicing.

 

[Liar]

Hm. Thanks, but somehow, I think the point of what I was trying to say went right past. I was a bit on the drubnk side yesterday, so it could be entirely my fault. But I fail to see how you could read my post as implying that disabled kids shouldn't recieve help or however that went. It's a strawman that would be insulting if I thought you actually meant it. (But I know you well enough to know that you don't.)

Look, I didn't mean to come off as bitter, but the fact of the matter was, that there and then, this cleverness separation (for the lack of a saner word) caused damage. It DID take resources from the less resourceful, but that's a minor complaint really. What it did more than anything was yank the fun out of learning from the top 20% of the "ungifted" kids that didn't make it into the top 5% that got the Gifted treatment.

Maybe the whole deal was poorly managed. Maybe all of this works splendidly everywhere else, and this was a local disaster. I dunno. And even if that's the case, if puts the light on a potetional problem to be weary of.

I maintain that a school's first priority must be to make kids want to learn. In a school system with infinite competence and infinite resources, this wouldn't be much of a problem. Every individual's need can be tailored to and catered for. But that system doesn't really exist, now does it? I don't think I really said anything other than that.

But it's damn criminal to not push kids as far as they can go. And past.

Indeed it is. Guess who weren't pushed. Just sayin'.

Anyway, I can see I'm not making myself understood here, So I'll just gracefully bow out.

 

[Iamcanadian28]

Documentation.

I am partially responsible (ahem) for the removal of a very bad teacher from our building this past May.

The man was amazingly unprofessional. Confused, had a tendency to lie when confronted on the facts, held grudges for months when he felt he was wronged, and his teaching skills were - not in existence. The thought was that perhaps he had a drug or alcohol problem, because he was very inconsistent with his moods and job quality.

Apparently they'd had many parental complaints but no one would ever push the issue. The principal, who inherited the man when she took her job, had been trying to build a case to get the person gone.

With my daughter in his class (for one week - this was in the middle of the year and there was a scheduling problem) I brought concerns to the principal, documented them, and pushed the issue. He finally blew it when he punished my daughter by dropping her grade from an A to a C. Then he lectured my child about how if she had concerns about him that she needed to talk to him, not her parent talking to the principal. My daughter is going - what? You're creepy, stay away from me! (Well, she told me she thought that, anyway.)

But that did it. Principal was very involved, I pulled her from his class immediately, we finished out the year. And wonder of wonders, he's gone.

And there was much rejoicing.

My question is if your daughter wasn't in the class and you weren't involved, would he still have been removed? I have seen very few teachers removed except for gross violations of ethics.

 

[Guest]

Liar -

We are coming at this from two different directions, aren't we?

I'm sorry.

 

[Guest]

My question is if your daughter wasn't in the class and you weren't involved, would he still have been removed? I have seen very few teachers removed except for gross violations of ethics.

Unless there is documentation of gross misconduct - proof - it's virtually impossible to remove a tenured teacher.

And my situation wouldn't have done it alone. But mine, built on years of other issues, finally was enough to turn the tide.

 

[Iamcanadian28]

Unless there is documentation of gross misconduct - proof - it's virtually impossible to remove a tenured teacher.

And my situation wouldn't have done it alone. But mine, built on years of other issues, finally was enough to turn the tide.

I know teachers have the same employment rights as everyone else, and I certainly am not suggesting they shouldn't. But given the value of the profession to our future generations, shouldn't their be a more strict code of conduct for what is expected. It seems for myself that all the parents and the principals already know which teachers aren't getting it done. Short of firing them, is their any disciplinary procedure to help fix these problems?

 

[JagFarlane]

Unless there is documentation of gross misconduct - proof - it's virtually impossible to remove a tenured teacher.

And my situation wouldn't have done it alone. But mine, built on years of other issues, finally was enough to turn the tide.

Here's an interesting question, that perhaps SSS and VM can answer [or at least I'd love to hear the answer]. What do you think about colleges, where the professor doesn't teach the class, but instead, has one of their grad students teach undergrad classes?

 

[Iamcanadian28]

Hm. Thanks, but somehow, I think the point of what I was trying to say went right past. I was a bit on the drubnk side yesterday, so it could be entirely my fault. But I fail to see how you could read my post as implying that disabled kids shouldn't recieve help or however that went. It's a strawman that would be insulting if I thought you actually meant it. (But I know you well enough to know that you don't.)

Look, I didn't mean to come off as bitter, but the fact of the matter was, that there and then, this cleverness separation (for the lack of a saner word) caused damage. It DID take resources from the less resourceful, but that's a minor complaint really. What it did more than anything was yank the fun out of learning from the top 20% of the "ungifted" kids that didn't make it into the top 5% that got the Gifted treatment.

Maybe the whole deal was poorly managed. Maybe all of this works splendidly everywhere else, and this was a local disaster. I dunno. And even if that's the case, if puts the light on a potetional problem to be weary of.

I maintain that a school's first priority must be to make kids want to learn. In a school system with infinite competence and infinite resources, this wouldn't be much of a problem. Every individual's need can be tailored to and catered for. But that system doesn't really exist, now does it? I don't think I really said anything other than that.

Indeed it is. Guess who weren't pushed. Just sayin'.

Anyway, I can see I'm not making myself understood here, So I'll just gracefully bow out.

The problem appears to be overall resources. I'm actually shocked that with our current technology their hasn't been a bigger push to get computers in all classes for the kids. If we could develop a program that would be interactive and individualized for each student, then we could have them all in the same room, yet still learning at different rates.

Perhaps I'm being idealistic, but we know that kids learn at vastly different rates and using different methods, so why are we going for cookie cutter education when we know it is less than optimal for a large percentage of the students?

 

[Emperor_Nero]

Here's an interesting question, that perhaps SSS and VM can answer [or at least I'd love to hear the answer]. What do you think about colleges, where the professor doesn't teach the class, but instead, has one of their grad students teach undergrad classes?

While not a teacher like SSS and VM, I do have perspective of a student and the parent of a student ...

And the answer seems to depend upon the involvement of the professor in supervising the grad students and/or the actual skill of the grad student. Just like teachers at the elementary, middle and high school levels -- some grad students are much more talented at making their undergrads learn than others. The same can be said for full professors too -- some are better than others.

 

[freshface]

Hm. Thanks, but somehow, I think the point of what I was trying to say went right past. I was a bit on the drubnk side yesterday, so it could be entirely my fault. But I fail to see how you could read my post as implying that disabled kids shouldn't recieve help or however that went. It's a strawman that would be insulting if I thought you actually meant it. (But I know you well enough to know that you don't.)

Look, I didn't mean to come off as bitter, but the fact of the matter was, that there and then, this cleverness separation (for the lack of a saner word) caused damage. It DID take resources from the less resourceful, but that's a minor complaint really. What it did more than anything was yank the fun out of learning from the top 20% of the "ungifted" kids that didn't make it into the top 5% that got the Gifted treatment.

Maybe the whole deal was poorly managed. Maybe all of this works splendidly everywhere else, and this was a local disaster. I dunno. And even if that's the case, if puts the light on a potetional problem to be weary of.

I maintain that a school's first priority must be to make kids want to learn. In a school system with infinite competence and infinite resources, this wouldn't be much of a problem. Every individual's need can be tailored to and catered for. But that system doesn't really exist, now does it? I don't think I really said anything other than that.

Indeed it is. Guess who weren't pushed. Just sayin'.

Anyway, I can see I'm not making myself understood here, So I'll just gracefully bow out.

I've been reading the posts with interest, but staying out of the discussion. Liar, you've been speaking quite nicely for me. They started the gifted program in my school when I was in 4th grade. Unfortunately, participants were chosen based on grades and classwork. I had long since given up doing much of the classwork. Why do twenty math problems, all alike, when the first two are easy? The select kids went off for their afternoons of fun and adventure. The rest of us did worksheets. All of us knew that we weren't special enough to go with them.

In sixth grade, my teacher and a colleague spent the first day dividing their classes so that the better readers went with one and the slower went with the other. It worked because they both taught English and Reading as the first two classes of the day, so that we all went directly to our assigned class. I think separating students works better when there are set periods and different classes.

 

[Liar]

While not a teacher like SSS and VM, I do have perspective of a student and the parent of a student ...

And the answer seems to depend upon the involvement of the professor in supervising the grad students and/or the actual skill of the grad student. Just like teachers at the elementary, middle and high school levels -- some grad students are much more talented at making their undergrads learn than others. The same can be said for full professors too -- some are better than others.

Indeed. A professor is a person who knows a lot about something. That doesn't mean that he's automatically good at teaching it.

Let me answer in the role of that teaching grad student. My last year at college, I taught sociolinguistics. I knew the subject at hand well enough to cover the basics, and I was a far better teacher than the professor, who niether had the patience not the imagination to explain things so that low-level students got the point. But only up to a certain point. I took care of the first two courses, and the professor took the second two more advanced courses, which required a teacher with academic depth and an intellectual level I have yet to mature into (and I doubt I ever will). By then, the students were more familiar with the basics, and the academic framework, so they didn't slow the professor down with dumb questions that I had been happy to answer.

All in all a good solution for the students. Plus it paid my rent.

 

[Guest]

I know teachers have the same employment rights as everyone else, and I certainly am not suggesting they shouldn't. But given the value of the profession to our future generations, shouldn't their be a more strict code of conduct for what is expected. It seems for myself that all the parents and the principals already know which teachers aren't getting it done. Short of firing them, is their any disciplinary procedure to help fix these problems?

You mean like they do for doctors, lawyers, senators?

Edited 'cause I forgot to add the

 

[voluptuary_manque]

In general, and only in general, the quality of teaching declines as the grades advance. Very few professors are employed for their teaching ability but rather for their research ability. Teaching, often, is a mere sideline to the job of research. It is the way universities work and have worked for generations. By the time a student reaches the university, I suppose, it is assumed that he/she is a self-motivated, skilled learner and doesn't really need to be taught, just introduced to information and turned loose. That's what the lecture system does, you know, so it really doesn't make much difference until the student has achieved sufficient level of expertise that actual stimulation and assistance with their own research is required. Then the senior professor's expertise becomes critical and that's when they come into real contact with the students. Admittedly, my university campus was, in those days, so small that even as freshmen we were face to face with department heads but that won't occur on a campus with 30,000 students.

The world's best teachers are needed in kindergarten, period.

 

[Iamcanadian28]

You mean like they do for doctors, lawyers, senators?

Edited 'cause I forgot to add the

Tell me about it

 

[Liar]

Liar -

We are coming at this from two different directions, aren't we?

I'm sorry.

De nada. Just glad I got the message across eventually. I should not try and get complex points across on seven shots of Pitú. (Only capirinihas for tourists are made with rum. )

I don't think there actually is a fence here. Just an understanding that every solution to a problem is likely to produce yet another one. That's the nature of a non black-and-white world.