@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:
Quote:I was curious about that too, in a quick survey it looks like gifted programs are more vulnerable when only one of the two can be funded. NCLB has not been kind to gifted programs, for example.
Gifted programs are not only an expense that does not promote what the schools are being graded on, but they are also a pain in the rear, as nearly every parent of a mediocre student feels that their baby deserves to be in the program, and they get peeved when the experts disagree.
That's baloney! To me, as a parent, and to my daughter, as the student, it
gives us both an incentive to do better in school. Not only that, but it also
teaches us that there are limitations to what one is capable of. My daughter's
curriculum has some AP classes but not all of hers are. She's a freshman
in high school and never had biology before, but she is determined to work
herself into an advanced program for the upcoming years.
Were my daughter in special education classes, I would be determined to
give her the necessary resources I have, to advance her. Perhaps I would not
succeed in all classes but certainly in some and I would emphasize on them
to make her feel good academically and to get her ahead of schedule.
Letting an mediocre student be mediocre is not an option, at least not in my
book.
In Mo's case, things are different, as Mo has a learning disability and I am
almost certain that I would not leave my child in a public school if my kid
had a disability. Of course, depending on the school district, some public
schools have excellent programs for kids with learning disabilities, but most
public schools let them fall through the cracks. I would not waste my time
with working against the system - you can't! It's like driving against the traffic
in a one-way street. As I said before, Mo would thrive much better in a different school environment.