DeBold 1

Kiersten DeBold
Mr.Newman
English: Rhetoric 101
1 December 2014

Gifted students not so gifted?

When a parent finds out that their child will be put into an advanced class in school no
matter what grade level, they are overly-joyed for them. While it is not only exhilarating news to
hear how well a child is doing, is also a feeling of self-accomplishment. A child would typically
have to test into the advanced course they would be taking along with numerous other students in
that school. Those students would then be located into a distinct classroom away from the rest of
their peers within their grade level and because they have been placed there, they will learn more
complex information at a quicker pace. So a parent would never expect to question whether or
not it would be a beneficial class for their child, would they? While some would instantly place
their child into any of these classes, others might be more hesitant. Although some may argue
that having gifted and talented programs like the one in New York City is not good for the
student because they will be isolated to a certain group of students, I believe that not only the
child, but the childs future could benefit from the class due to them working with children at the
same academic level as them while creating a better life for themselves and opening up
opportunities for children that have not be accepted into the gifted program.

DeBold 2

Separating average students from advanced students is something that is commonly done
in our educational system whether it be determined by our teachers or by a state wide test. This is
so commonly done because of the academic risings that are seen from it. As Professor Bruce
Sacerdote states in his article, Tracking Students by Ability Produces Academic Results,
students benefit from being in classrooms with peers of a similar ability. In other words,
when a student is put with a group of other students that are at an equal academic level, they
typically tend to work better and work together to produce better work. Even though students
that have been accepted by borderline qualifications have not shown an increase in test scores,
students that were accepted with higher academic criteria have improved. Placing students with
higher abilities together is not only good for academics, but is also good for sports teams.
Coaches have said that they have seen an increase in performance when they group them with
peers at the same level. Overall it is better for a child to be placed with other children that have
similar standards as them because they are more likely to succeed.
Even though it has been proven that these gifted programs do work, according to Halley
Potter, a policy associate from The Century Foundation and David Tipson, director of New York
Appleseed, gifted and talented (G&T) programs have a long history of exacerbating
socioeconomic and racial segregation within city schools. Their argument is that these programs
are creating segregation within classrooms since roughly 70 percent of students in New York are
Latino or Black, but a higher percentage of students that are put into gifted programs are Asian
or White. The authors suggest that students that are placed in a segregated class with Latinos
and blacks demonstrate the educational harms of segregation for low-income students. And on
the other hand the Asian and White students that are being segregated from Latinos and Blacks
lack in social benefits because they are not in a racially diverse class. As a result for these recent

DeBold 3

problems, Potter and Tipson suggest that New York schools should eliminate gifted and talented
programs school wide and create mixed-ability classes. If Potter and Tipson remove gifted
programs they would be taking away the constructing of a higher intelligence for the future
generation. Those students that are receiving above average grades should be given the
opportunity to stride in classrooms full of other students that are just as determined. We should
be supporting and encouraging these students to continue doing as well as they are rather than
take away the programs that are designed for them.
Rather than taking away gifted programs from children that deserve it, why doesnt the
city of New York make it available to all? While yes it is understood that it is called a gifted
program for a reason and that not all children are accepted, but it is possible to make the courses
less challenging than gifted while still being more challenging than average. As associate
professor of economics and urban Policy at the Milano Graduate School, Darrick Hamilton
explains, black and Latino students improved dramatically after implementing curricular and
teaching reformss designed to offer high quality education to all students. Since it has been
proven that these students can improve if they are given the opportunity programs should be
made to continue to help them. If this is done then not only will there be gifted programs for
above average students, but there will also be in between programs for children that are not at an
advanced level.
The students in these gifted programs could be the geniuses of the future generation.
These children are, as Frederick Hess director of education policy studies says, most likely to
one day develop miraculous cures, produce inspiring works, invent technological marvels and
improve the lives of all Americans. Taking away their gifted programs could be detrimental to
our future society whether we know it or not. While yes if these programs are cut the children

DeBold 4

will still be academically inclined, but their brains will not be challenged and they will become
bored with these simplistic classes. The children that are soon to be deprived of a gifted or
talented program are eventually going to be our doctors, scientists, authors, and government so
why lower their education to the minimum when we know they can go far beyond that.
As of now the question of whether or not gifted and talented programs are beneficial to
children today is still open for discussion, but we all know the real answer; yes. These young
children are our future and if we do not prepare them to become the best they can be then who
says they ever will. Gifted programs should not be taken away just because the class is not as
diverse as some would like it to be. These programs have proven to be beneficial so therefore we
should not take away these classes.

DeBold 5

Works cited
Hamilton, Darrick. Not Gifted Eduaction, but Quality Education for All. New York
Times:Room for Debate. New York Times Company, 14 June 2014. Web. 16 November
2014
Hess, Frederick. Americas Future Depends on Gifted Students. New York Times:Room for
Debate. New York Times Company, 4 June 2014. Web. 16 November 2014
Potter, Halley and Tipson, David. Eliminate Gifted Tracks and Expand to a Schoolwide
Approach. New York Times: Room for Debate. New York Times Company, 4 June
2014. Web. 16 November 2014.
Sacerdote, Bruce. Tracking Students By Ability Produces Academic Results. New York Times:
Room for Debate. New York Times Company, 4 June 2014. Web. 16 November 2014.