Archived: The Educational System in the United States: Case Study Findings

Education for the Gifted Student
Twenty years ago, few programs existed for gifted and talented students; yet by
1990, 38 states served more than 2 million gifted students in kindergarten through
12th grade. Twenty-six state and trust territories required that schools provide spe-
cialized services and programs for gifted and talented students, and 27 had passed
legislation encouraging districts to provide such programs; only 6 states and terri-
tories lacked such legislation. However, the percentage of students identified as
gifted in each state varies due to differences in state laws and practices. For exam-
ple, 4 states identify more than 10 percent of their students as gifted and talented,
while 21 states identify fewer than 5 percent. According to NELS data, in 1988,
65 percent of the public schools had some kind of opportunity for gifted and tal-
ented students, and approximately 9 percent of all 8th-grade public high school
students participated in gifted and talented programs (USDE 1993).
Two of the most common approaches to educating gifted students are enrichment
activities and acceleration practices. Enrichment typically means that students are
offered more varied educational experiences. Enrichment programs might include
after-school or Saturday classes, resource rooms, additions to regular classroom
curriculum, or special interest clubs (Colangelo & Davis 1991).
Acceleration usually includes early entrance to kindergarten or college, grade skip-
ping, self-paced studies, or part-time grade acceleration in which a student re-
ceives advanced instruction in one or more content areas for part of each day
(Colangelo & Davis 1991).
Programs for Gifted Students
Not all schools that we visited had programs for gifted and talented students, but
the programs that did exist depended on the priorities of the local school districts.
Programs for gifted students were left up to the principal of the school or the
local school board. Most teachers and parents thought that gifted children should
be encouraged to develop their talents in school through special programs that
provide challenging instruction for these students.
Among the few programs for gifted students were those at Rockefeller Elementary
School and the other suburban schools. The program for gifted students at Rocke-
feller Elementary began in the fourth grade. Gifted students were ‘‘pulled-out’’ of
their regular classrooms to receive special instruction in academic subjects, such
as arithmetic or reading. Likewise, the pullout math program for gifted students
began in the fourth grade in elementary schools in the district of Vanderbilt Mid-

---

103
dle School. Students were selected on the basis of scores on a test given to third-
graders at the school. According to the math teacher at Vanderbilt, 90 percent
of the criteria for admission were based on objective measures, including this test
given in the third grade.
The emphasis on objective criteria was necessary, according to the math teacher
at Rolling Hills, because many parents in the Rolling Hills district tried to persuade
the school to place their children in the pull out program. The teacher explained,
‘‘The concern is that if their kids do not take calculus by the 12th grade, they
won’t be able to get into Harvard.’’
A mother at Vanderbilt explained why there must be an emphasis on test scores
in determining eligibility for gifted programs:
There are always parents who feel that their kids need to be in the extended
math program (the gifted program), even though they are not even close to
qualifying. I know that these parents have met with the principal and they
have poured over the test scores. But ultimately it is the test scores. They will
retest a kid if they think that the scores don’t make sense. Every one of us
wants enrichment for our kids. We want our kids to be challenged to the limit.
We don’t want them to be so challenged that they get frustrated. If there is
the slightest doubt, that child will be re-evaluated. Most of the time there isn’t
a lot to stand on. As we say in Rolling Hills, all of the kids in Rolling Hills
are gifted.
In the sixth grade, students in the Rolling Hills district were given an examination
designed to predict academic success in algebra courses. Students who scored
above a certain level on this examination were asked to take the SAT during the
sixth grade. ‘‘Many of the 6th-graders score better than I did in the 11th grade,’’
joked a math teacher at Vanderbilt. The sixth-grade students with the top four or
five scores on the SAT qualified for a special program in math beginning in the
seventh grade. These students, along with qualifying students from other junior
high schools, were bused to the district’s high school three times a week to re-
ceive accelerated instruction in math. In addition to this program, two high-level
math courses were also offered to students at Vanderbilt Middle School.
Although there were classes for high-achieving students, the gifted programs in
math and science at the average and low-achieving elementary and middle schools
were limited or nonexistent. Some schools had no program for gifted students.
Educators indicated that these programs would divert financial resources away
from remedial and other programs needed at these schools.

---

104
The lack of gifted programs at many schools may contribute to the perception
that gifted students are being ignored by the schools. A teacher at West Middle
School said, ‘‘I think the very highly gifted get cheated somewhat in our American
school system.’’ This belief was shared by other teachers, parents, and administra-
tors with whom we spoke.
Summary
In the United States, there is no national policy regarding the treatment of ability
differences. Instead, local school districts and school principals implement prac-
tices based on their beliefs about individual differences, their perceptions of the
needs of students, and their financial resources. Local autonomy over schools cre-
ates great variety in the educational programs.
Many public schools in the United States serve a diverse student body in terms
of both social background and individual differences in ability. In an effort to deal
with such a diverse array of students, teachers reported relying on a number of
strategies. A central strategy is tracking and ability grouping. These practices begin
as early as elementary school and are nearly universal. All schools in the sample
practiced some form of ability grouping or tracking, although the types of practice
varied considerably.
Differing approaches to individual differences was also seen in practices associated
with cooperative learning, homework, grading, and computerized instruction.
Some practices, particularly detracking and lenient grading, appeared to be a
source of friction between administrators and parents who felt that a grouping
by ability would serve the needs of their children better
Cooperative learning, the pairing of faster learning students with those who learn
more slowly, was a practice that we observed again and again. Teachers in all
three locations reported relying on cooperative groups to manage individual dif-
ferences. There was a belief among most of the teachers that such an arrangement
has benefits over whole-class instruction. Those who learn more rapidly are as-
sumed to reinforce their own learning by helping others; slower students are as-
sumed to benefit from the extra help they obtain from their peers.
Parents, teachers, administrators, and students were highly cognizant of the role
that family stability and support has in creating individual differences. Many linked
the problems in the schools to the lack of family support they believed to be
widespread within their communities.

---

105
Equity issues were considered to be of great importance, and many of the persons
we interviewed talked freely about inequities they perceived or did not perceive.
Gender equality in access to math and sciences was not a central concern of most
of the respondents. Many indicated that they believed that the barriers to math
and science achievement for girls had largely been eliminated. In contrast, racial
inequities were widely acknowledged and were a frequent source of concern.
Remedial and special education played large but varied role in the schools in the
three locations. Every school that we visited offered some program for students
with special needs. However, the programs differed greatly from school to school.
Some were large and included students in need of remedial help. Others were lim-
ited to students with severe learning disabilities.
A few schools had programs for highly gifted students in math and science, but
most of the schools did not. Many respondents conveyed their belief in the impor-
tance of gifted programs, but at the same time, they felt that gifted education was
not being given the necessary resources in their schools.
There is no consistent system in the United States for dealing with individual dif-
ferences in students’ abilities. Rather, there is a variegated landscape of systems;
each school district and school has, for the most part, developed its own pro-
grams and approaches. Nonetheless, some strategies were consistently observed
across schools and locations. In addition to age-graded classrooms, tracking and
ability grouping in math and science were nearly universal practices. Most teach-
ers used some form of cooperative learning and believed in its effectiveness. As
strategies for dealing with individual differences, many teachers conducted ques-
tion-and-answer sessions, assigned homework according to students’ ability, or re-
lied on other instructional resources. Experiments with eliminating or changing
almost every one of the practices were reported by nearly every district, school
or teacher we visited.
Finally, parents, teachers, administrators, and parents from a wide range of back-
grounds indicated their belief that differences in family support contributes greatly
to creating individual differences in academic achievement. The perception is that
individual differences in performance begins in the home. At the same time, the
lively discussions about individual differences that we had with parents, teachers,
and students emphasized the importance which they placed on equity and access
in school for all students.

---

---

107