The Push to Diversify Gifted-and-Talented Programs

Saturday, December 3rd, 2016

The push to diversify gifted-and-talented programs is on:

The Department of Education has allowed the highly sought-after school [the Brooklyn School of Inquiry] to set aside 40 percent of its kindergarten seats specifically for low-income children.

[...]

Citywide, about 77 percent of students are poor and almost 70 percent are black or Hispanic. Last year, BSI’s poverty rate was 23 percent, and less than 10 percent of students were black or Hispanic.

The disparity is not unique to BSI, or to gifted education. Citywide, about 73 percent of gifted students are white or Asian, and the poverty rate averages around 43 percent.

There are almost no students in the city’s gifted programs who are learning English, have special needs, or are in temporary housing. Put together, they make up less than 10 percent.

“What we have right now is something we should be ashamed of,” said James Borland, who directs gifted-education programs at Teachers College at Columbia University.

We should be ashamed of the fact that almost no students in the city’s gifted programs are learning English, have special needs, or are in temporary housing. Clearly.

There’s no getting off this policy treadmill:

Districts used to be able to set their own admissions criteria for gifted programs. That changed in 2007, when the city standardized entry based on test scores, in part to increase diversity. A non-verbal test, also intended to address inequities, was added in 2012. Yet today’s gifted programs remain segregated.

Gifted programs are often seen as a way to help integrate schools:

“It is a way to attract white, higher-income families to a school. But once you do that, it’s like gentrifying a school,” she said. “You walk down the hallway, and you can tell which classroom is gifted and talented and which classroom is general education.”

Comments

  1. Mikeski says:

    “No Child Allowed Ahead” is alive and well!

  2. Bomag says:

    about 77 percent of students are poor

    We need a new definition of poverty. I suspect most all these kids are well fed, clothed, sheltered, and have access to the web.

    Again, drearily so, we see that diversity has become something that is imposed from above. Left alone, people tend to self segregate.

    A character from stories past was of the mad scientist, fervently mixing chemicals to come up with a new, evil concoction that would bring terror to civilization. Today’s theme is of the mad social scientist, madly mixing people and failed central state policies to bring terror to civilization.

  3. Morris says:

    “We need a new definition of poverty. I suspect most all these kids are well fed, clothed, sheltered, and have access to the web.”

    Correct. Poverty as once understood meant lacking in the areas of food, shelter, clothing. For the most part, even predominantly so, these “poor” children do not lack for any of that? So what is “poor” then?

Leave a Reply