When my partner shared the news with our son, “Lynden, you weren’t accepted into the gifted program,” I could see his disappointment, even if he tried to hide it. The weight of rejection was evident, but I felt a sense of relief wash over me.
As a parent, it’s natural to feel defensive when your child seems to be overlooked, especially when he consistently earns top grades and demonstrates a range of capabilities. I initially struggled with the idea that a lengthy evaluation process could deem my son unworthy of joining the school’s most academically talented students. However, any lingering bitterness quickly faded. In truth, I have significant reservations about the concept of gifted programs in general, stemming from three core concerns.
The Problem with Testing
The final hurdle for Lynden was a composite score from various intelligence assessments that fell short of the required threshold. This reliance on standardized testing to categorize children’s abilities is troubling. In our district, the gifted program mandates multiple evaluations, including tests like the Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test or the Naglieri Nonverbal Ability Test, alongside other assessments such as the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children.
To put it plainly, I’m completely over the excessive testing designed to divide children into categories. Regardless of the credentials possessed by those who create these tests, I firmly believe that no exam can accurately or ethically determine a child’s intelligence.
Advocacy and Parental Pressure
The second issue is the role of pushy parents in securing spots for their children in gifted programs. I’ve observed that many students who gain admission do so primarily because their parents advocate for them. In Lynden’s case, his assessment was prompted by his second-grade teacher, which is not the norm. Typically, without a dedicated advocate at home, children rely solely on insightful teachers to initiate the process.
Moreover, if a child wishes to join the gifted program yet doesn’t pass the initial testing, there is often an appeal route. Families can hire third-party evaluators to reassess their child’s eligibility. This system inherently favors those who have the resources and support at home, leaving others at a disadvantage.
Exclusivity of Enrichment Opportunities
The gifted program at my son’s school offers enriching projects such as charitable initiatives and educational field trips—experiences that any student would cherish. These activities foster community engagement, experiential learning, and social connection. However, I can’t help but question why such valuable enrichment is confined to a select group of students. Is civic involvement and experiential learning only reserved for those deemed “gifted”? I think not.
In fact, these programs might be missing a crucial chance to bring more children into the fold, allowing those in gifted programs to share their experiences and values with their peers. This could help diminish the artificial barriers created by testing.
Reflecting on the gifted program, I often recall one instance that encapsulates my feelings. Some time ago, I dropped my children off at school and noticed three gleaming charter buses idling nearby. “What are those for?” I asked, a hint of annoyance creeping into my tone. “The gifted kids are going to Epcot today,” my son replied with a smirk. My immediate reaction was one of disdain, but I quickly composed myself and encouraged my kids to “work harder so you’ll have the last laugh.” Recently, when Lynden felt disheartened, I reiterated that advice. If he takes it to heart, I believe he will prevail.
This perspective aligns with the broader themes of empowerment and resilience, which are essential in navigating life’s challenges.
For more insights on family planning and related topics, check out our piece on home insemination kits. Additionally, if you’re interested in expert advice, visit Dr. Jenna Thompson’s site for valuable insights. For those looking into pregnancy options, Cleveland Clinic is an excellent resource for information on intrauterine insemination.
In summary, while my son may not have made the gifted program, I find solace in the values of perseverance and the belief that his journey is just beginning, one that may lead him to greater successes down the line.