Why on earth would you do this. Figure out how to lift up the other schools. Encourage and help people apply to the good ones. Don’t tear them down...
7
As a tech person and owner of a tech firm, and educator I cannot emphasize the importance of education both arts and sciences. The issue here is not the elimination of these programs which would cause many parents to leave the school system if not the state, but to make certain that we get parents involved in their children's learning. The issue is that poorer people are usually at a disadvantage. So why not pay students from these schools to tutor and mentor the younger students under supervision?
5
We parented two children through the entire G&T and Specialized HS programs, one at Stuyvesant and the other at Bronx Science. Now, one is a junior at an Ivy League college the other is a freshman at a flagship State university. Our kids were smart, but without us, parents, they would achieve bupkis. Why don’t any of these inane plans include the role of the parents? Why is it up to kids, who owe everything to their parents, to lift up those who need help through historically failed measures? I’m a parent who has volunteered regularly at my children’s schools for a decade, and I have no problem with shared sacrifice for a worthy goal, like lifting all NYC kids. But ALL parents need to do their share.
4
@Kevork Khrimian I understand where your coming from but this is 1: not the place for this and 2: not worded in a way that makes you sound great, please don't say that your kinds wouldn't achieve anything if you didn't help, I greatly doubt that, also kids should choose what this think is better for them in reason, if the parents chose there would be a lot of kids sitting in class when it doesn't work with them and then getting lectured because of it
Programs for gifted students are the reciprocal of programs of special-needs students. The racial or ethnic disparities in participation in gifted programs roughly reflect the actual performance of students. Those performances are skewed by disparities in the quality of education available to adversely affected racial or ethnic student population. The fix is not to eliminate programs for the gifted students with their own "special needs," but to enhance the education received by those handicapped by the current distribution of good teachers and other resources. Dumbing down a school system in the name of equality does nothing to eliminate educational inequalities.
7
In another article on the same subject in The New York Times appearing two days ago, “The Plan to Scrap New York’s Gifted Programs: 5 Takeaways,” several comments in response to the article deserve writers’ Vivian Wang’s and Eliza Shapiro’s attention, including for example the following ideas: the need for parents to focus on their children’s preparation courses for the gifted tests; protection of high IQ children should exist in the same way special ed children are protected; gifted programs cannot replace the early parental home education all children need to flourish; multi-level classes cannot serve all students, especially the gifted and talented who are often held back in such classes; gifted children may also qualify as a minority; and many other valuable insights. Author Azi Paybarah may also find these points relevant.
Perhaps authors Wang and Shapiro might interview some of those who submitted these kinds of comments for a follow-up piece.
In addition, by the way, some of the gifted programs “live” in schools that minority students also attend, and more frequently than most people know, those children in the gifted class and those in the non-gifted classes often meet up in school and many times become friends and develop friendships that last long after they leave the schools.
6
Brilliant! You have a program serving 15,000 students that is, by all accounts, a wild success. So what would you do next? (A) Replicate this success in every school or (B) trash it altogether because you don’t like the optics? Guess which side deBlasio’s hand-picked “experts” recommended? You can’t make this stuff up.
26
Instead of dismantling the gifted and talented programs, we should be doing more to see a growing number of students qualify for such programs. All students should be valued and none should be limited in achieving their potential, especially not limited by the color of their skin. I think everyone agrees on this.
We should keep the focus on equality of opportunity rather than equality of outcomes. Consider professional sports. The NBA looks for the most qualified players, regardless of their race. It so happens that in the NBA, especially among its most talented players, we see many more Black players than White, Asian, etc. The NBA does not apologize for this fact nor attempt to explain it or correct it.
Why are we so hung up an equality? Why can't we accept that their might be some natural differences in ability among a public school student body as diverse as New York City's? As long as each individual student is given an equal chance to rise up, we should keep the gifted and talented programs and expand them further.
20
@Leon
I believe in increased access for everyone, but the story of the NBA is not as simple as you suggest. Many Black men excel at basketball because it is one of the few sports available to kids without money. It doesn't require a pool, or a field, or a trip to the mountains, or special equipment. In addition, many Black people (mistakenly, in my view) are focused on sports as a route of social mobility so they work hard at it from a young age. If other groups had the same circumstances, there might be more diversity in the NBA.
2
@Lifelong Reader
Black men also make up the majority of NFL players, close to 70%. Merit decides who gets into the league.
And ALL of the U.S. Olympic 4X100 sprinters have been Black for decades. Again, it is all by merit. There has been no attempt to "integrate" the relay team with slower Whites and Asians. And there should not be!
5
I've worked for the DOE for almost 15 years (4 different schools). I worked at one of the famed citywide g & t schools for a while. I am glad this topic is finally coming to light, and I will only comment on g & t elementary screens since the high school issue is a whole other can of worms. My colleagues would frequently talk about how the K screening progress is absurd. Many people prep and that is fine (well no it's not) but again, we're talking 4 year olds. I can tell you from working in all types of elementary schools that true academic "giftedness" (if we are going the route of academia and research) at the Kindergarten level is rare. Most experts support screening at around 2nd or 3rd grade when there's more concrete data collected - think reading levels, math assessments, writing samples. There is a huge issue when students who are supposed to be "above grade level" are getting tutored in 1st grade! People, smoke and mirrors. I am not saying get rid of g & t programs entirely, not at all. We need to modify when and how students are screened and consider past teacher recommendations. Additionally, I couldn't stomach working in a building where we served virtually no one from the surrounding neighborhood and community (this could be UWS or LES, take your pick). I loved my students and families and this is not an attack on them, but deep down always felt there was something morally wrong with the system at large.
4
It is Socialism in action: Punish success; reward failure.
George Keenan, US diplomat to the USSR from the 1930s to the 60s, saw it all and wrote about its result. He wrote: "They said they would make everyone equal, and they did. Everyone is equally poor."
New York public schools were once the best public schools in the world. No more. Bye bye, New York.
22
Yes, let's make the NYC Public School system mediocre in EVERY possible way. We are not going to work on obvious problems that will require years to solve, many of which were created by the DOE. We are going to ensure that NOBODY gets a good education. That's fair.
I'm a Black New Yorker who was accepted to Stuyvesant and whose sibling attended Brooklyn Tech. The only reason I and other kids from my low-income neighborhood and not great jr high school were able to compete is students were tracked by academic ability starting in elementary school and there were Special Progress (SP) classes for academically high achieving students in junior high.
For whatever reason, not every child who comes to school is ready, able, or willing to learn. So you're going to destroy the scant opportunity of the kids who ARE by mixing all the kids together? The teacher inevitably is distracted by behavior problems and must teach to the lowest common denominator.
I'm not saying that the entrance to G & T programs should be based on a single test at the age of 4. The test should be administered more frequently and kids should be moved up when appropriate. But scrapping all the programs? That's absurd, as is getting rid of the SHSAT.
Carranza is a disaster: The SHSAT, his firing of senior staff, his elevation of unqualified people, his cultural re-education initiatives (and I believe in concepts like "White Supremacy", and "White Privilege," but the way they're being taught is laughable).
52
@Lifelong Reader beautifully and accurately expressed from start to finish; thank you
2
From the And Finally story: “The Poles say “ko-SHCH-OO-SH-ko,” but many Brooklynites say “Kos-kee-OSS-ko.”
Brooklyn folks have a ditty to remember the way we say it (or at least they will if this catches on)
Tune of “Let’s Call The Whole Thing Off?
Now you say “ko-SHCH-OO-SH-ko”
And I say “Kos-kee-OSS-ko”
However you say it - will it get me to Costco?
Rhymes with Bosco.
Some say it rhymes with Moscow!
I think the Gov’nor's off!
And let’s call the whole trip off!
8
The reason many Brooklynites say “Kos-kee-OSS-ko” is because Ralph Kramden pronounced it that way when the sleepwalking Ed Norton would take him on a tour of the Kosciuszko Street sewer on Thursday nights.
11
So dB is closing gifted programs. Why? Because those that don't qualify are offended and feel slighted? Here take your participation ribbon and feel that you accomplished something. Spare me. Work harder and you might get into a gifted program. Great life lessons we're teaching kids.
25
@Margo Channing
I am for retaining the programs, but it's not that simple. Many people believe that getting into a G & T program reflects a 4-year-old's family background and test prep more than anything else.
The issue is whether the school system is permanently exiling the students who aren't admitted. Are they being given the education to improve? Are there other entry points to the programs at a later time in the child's career? In any event, G & T or not, every child has a right to a good education.
15
This isn't a plan to achieve equality by helping students who are struggling. It's a plan to achieve equality by punishing students who are succeeding.
The reason for the achievement disparity is that students in higher income neighborhoods have far greater access to gifted and talented programs. Expand these programs into every community, don't eliminate them. This proposal, if implemented, will have exactly the opposite of it's intended effect.
29
@Martin Goodall
I could not agree more. And when the disaster of the changes becomes obvious, there will be a new mayor in office and a new DOE chancellor who will have to clean up the mess, not to mention, the negative impact on how many kids?
Anyone, except perhaps for progressive educators, could have predicted the effect of ending tracking. Surely there were other ways of protecting kids' self-esteem (if that was really an issue) and educating them at the appropriate level while re-evaluating at intervals (but oh my God, that would require testing).
18
I had been worried that a downturn in the economy might cause the value of my home just outside NYC to drop. Looks like I can expect it to surge. Thanks, Mayor DeBlasio!
23
It’s beyond disingenuous the way the Times (mainly through Eliza Shapiro, who is more opinion columnist than analytical journalist) has covered recent reforms the nyc public school system. How is a school segregated when the majority of children attend whatever school is in their zoned district? Hint: it’s not.
By writing carelessly about important issues, you not only tarnish the NYT’s great legacy; you also insult the memory of the students who were actually affected and disadvantaged by segregation in this country less than a century ago. Please do better.
42
@Concerned Reader
I have commented before that especially in terms of the Specialized High Schools, "segregation" is not the term that should be used. "Segregation" is an imposed system under which people of a particular group are deliberately excluded. That is not the case here. Admission to the SHS is by an exam that is open to everyone. Black and Latinx students were present in much larger numbers in the 1980s. That so few are scoring well enough to gain admission now is almost certainly a reflection of the quality of the lower schools.
Some also have said that many of the Black and Latinx students are not taking the exam because they receive scholarships to private schools or attend charter schools. Is that true? The Times has not investigated these questions.
23
@Lifelong Reader
(fixing typo)
"many of the BEST Black and Latinx students"
1
@Lifelong Reader
The gifted Black and Latino students are recruited by Charter Schools. They enroll in charters because every family wants the best education for their children. The Mayor Blasio is too lazy to fix the schools system and wants the impression of diversity. This Mayor has been a disaster for the public school system.
23
Eliminating tracking in the NYC will take great courage and is almost certainly political suicide but the stubborn facts are these: many studies have shown when school districts have done this, the best students have not suffered in their prospects while less talented students have benefited greatly. No this is not about race, this about giving all students a fair chance to succeed.
2
Until you've felt the conflicted misery of being unable to quiet down and engage a student who must be the center of attention (often negative) and who disrupts the flow of a class and makes it hard for the others to focus on their work, and also simultaneously to excite the curiosity of kids who love to learn -- or to deal with and even comfort parents who are at the ends of their rope -- you really don't know what facts are.
38
@jonr
complete and total nonsense. my G&A children in a non-tracking school have functionally been teacher's aides since kindergarten. my kids are bored to death and beginning to hate school while the low performers continue to drain all of the districts resources while showing zero improvement
16
Once again we have an outpouring of anecdotal nonsense. If you want another anecdote, my son went to Park Slope Collegiate which abolished tracking and then to Edward Murrow HS which is is an ed opt school with many low performing students and it hasn't made the slightest difference in which colleges he's now considering. But really, do your homework and look at the existing studies. You need to factor out race and behavioral problems. Lower performing students benefit from being in the same classroom with higher performing students. The higher level students are not impeded in their learning progress- it's that simple. Emotion clouds the facts in this case. Once again, this proposal is not talking about race just relative academic performance. It makes me sad to see some of the derogatory statements made here by Times readers.
There's nothing to explain. It's the natural progression of policies of the left--- the race to bottom-- where all are "equal".
22
@Steve
Most of the comments here are from people on the left. Do any of us sound as if we support policies that deny education opportunities to deserving students?
Every issue or action is not right or left.
8
I'm sorry, but it is infuriating to keep hearing of "segregation" and "inequality" in higher end academic institutions, when it is simply untrue. The admission tests treat everyone equally, without bias toward gender or race. The admissions are based solely on scoring. What could possibly be more fair? No politics or favoritism--simply based on scoring.
The problems are social-economic problems that are occurring PRIOR to the admission tests. Many if not most of those gaining admission come from households which give education a premium. That have parents who insist on their children doing homework and studying each evening, and involve themselves in the child's studies. Giving a quiz at breakfast in not unusual.
Now those who do not gain admission gather and cry about segregation and inequality. And of course the politicians take the easy route and agree--rather then doing something about the quality of urban elementary schools--or heaven forbid, chastising the parents for not prompting their children along in their studies.
Treat the problem, not the affect. And for goodness sake, stop falling back on the lame and incorrect cry of segregation.
65
@Billy from Brooklyn
Yours is the most powerful comment and there have been many on this subject and sadly 100% true and accurate. Let's dumb down things because not every child can gain entry into a gifted program. Another generation raised on excuses.
21