G&T increases don't reflect systemic change
As we await word from the Department of Educationon first-grade G&T eligibility, a succinct, cogent analysisof kindergarten G&T testing, in a GothamSchoolscomments string, is well worth considering, especially set against DOE claims of gains in historically underserved communities. The author is Jennifer Jennings, an education blogger, grad student, and recent coauthor, with Leonie Haimson, of a report indicting the DOEfor dubious high-school pushout practices.
Jennings notes that last year and this year, three districts (of 32 citywide) were the source of 40 percent of all students qualifying for gifted programs - districts 2 and 3 in Manhattan, and District 22 in Brooklyn.
Adding in districts 15, 20, and 21, all of Brooklyn, which are the next three largest contributors to the G&T student pool, 56 percent of all admissions, this year and last, went to students from just six districts.
So even though the numbers are up, the basic landscape of gifted education "has not changed in any meaningful way," Jennings writes. She continues, "expressing the growth in number of seats in terms of percent changes is extremely misleading given that the poor districts had a tiny number of students participating to begin with."
A Times analysis attempted to raise similar, if less pointed, questions, but DOE spokesman Andy Jacob said he couldn't provide an official “definitive explanation.” Let's hope that changes, and quickly, too.
Please Post Comments