This has sent many subscribers to my into a panic. Not because they necessarily believe their children are gifted, but because a G&T program is often the only chance to give students an education slightly better than what鈥檚 otherwise offered in a city where almost fail to meet an already for grade-level performance. 

Testing in second grade for a third grade G&T entry, however, would put NYC in line with other districts. New Jersey districts test kids in first and second grades. also begins in second grade and continues admissions testing up through middle school. 

But a bigger issue than when to open G&T is when to close it. Once children have been labeled “gifted,” it doesn’t seem that they are ever retested for the duration of their academic career. Furthermore, in many places, if children miss the optimal window for demonstrating 鈥済iftedness,鈥� their academic options grow more limited.

Is that a sensible policy? A new in the journal Intelligence & Cognitive Abilities suggests otherwise:

[C]lassifications [of giftedness] are largely unwarranted. Those showing high cognitive ability at early childhood might lose their marks as they age. Conversely, those showing average cognitive ability may increase their marks as they age鈥�. Of those scoring one standard deviation above the mean at age 7, only a tiny minority preserve their high-ability marks afterwards. Moreover, some children scoring below the standards of high ability at age 7 move upward in the cognitive distribution.

What does this mean for education policy?

For some, it suggests schools should scrap all G&T programs for kids under 12, as that鈥檚 when what the authors describe as general cognitive ability begins to stabilize. This is the approach NYC attempted 鈥� and failed to accomplish 鈥� in . 

For others, it means retesting those already in G&T programs and, if their score dips below the threshold, booting them back to general ed. Some NYC parents have privately forwarded me communications from their schools pushing to remove a child from advanced classes due to underperformance. Similar scenarios have popped up on across the country, including students being .

But my position when it comes to education has always been more, not less. Instead of cutting NYC G&T programs because not enough Hispanic or Black students are enrolled, as repeatedly advocated by former Mayor Bill de Blasio, I lobbied for opening more such programs, so more children would have access.

In that same vein, students should be tested before age 7 鈥� and again after. 

If students show high ability after third grade, they should be moved into a G&T program. In NYC, this is almost impossible due to space limitations. As it is, at the kindergarten level, over 9,000 students applied for only 2,500 spots. There wasn鈥檛 enough room to accommodate even all those who qualified at age 5, much less those who might meet the criteria down the road. But this is a solvable problem. General education classrooms can be converted for G&T based on the number of students eligible for a seat. As the overall student population wouldn鈥檛 increase, just changing the classification shouldn鈥檛 cost the district any more money, at any grade level.

The trickier question comes from what to do with students who previously qualified as 鈥済ifted鈥� but, upon retesting, no longer score as high. In a scarcity model, where there are only so many spots to go around, the instinct might be to return them to general ed.

However, I would venture that a child who has been keeping up with the work in a 鈥済ifted鈥� classroom should be allowed to remain, in spite of a newly recalculated score. 

This way, the system would accommodate both those who鈥檝e demonstrated the potential to do higher-level work and those who are already doing it. Does it really matter if they鈥檙e called 鈥渉igh potential鈥� or 鈥渉igh achieving,鈥� as long as they鈥檙e capable? 

This approach would be especially beneficial for underrepresented, low-income and minority students. While advocates for getting rid of all G&T programs claim they are doing it for the welfare of the kids, research, including in the paper quoted above, shows the opposite. Underrepresented, low-income and minority students actually benefit the most from engaging with what the paper’s authors call “cognitively demanding activities.鈥� For these kids, the 鈥渇ade out effect鈥� and drop in General Cognitive Ability scores upon being removed from a rigorous environment is actually more pronounced if they are returned to a less intellectually stimulating classroom. 

In fact, the earlier such students are placed in G&T programs, the better they tend to perform in the long run, up through high school.

A robust G&T system would work for all students. It would both identify young high achievers 鈥� whether they are naturally 鈥済ifted鈥� or have simply been exposed to more of what鈥檚 on the test 鈥� and expand to make room for late bloomers. It would regularly retest children to make sure they are at the correct academic level and offer those with high potential the opportunity to tackle more challenging work, while rewarding hard workers with the opportunity to keep doing it 鈥� regardless of an IQ score that seesaws at least until age 21.

It鈥檚 a system that would always offer more. Never less. 

Their parents are desperate for options when it comes to accommodating children capable of doing above grade-level work. In a city of close to 1 million students, where, in some neighborhoods, half are scoring in the top 10th percentile on IQ tests, that equals thousands of underserved kids.

Several states, including Alabama, Kansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Washington and West Virginia, offer an . A few more, like Arizona, Florida and Kentucky, have a variation, like an Individual Service Plan or a Gifted Student Service Plan.

I asked subscribers to my whether they would support a situation like the one currently available in , where giftedness is bundled under special education and all students who qualify receive an IEP.

Provisions of this law include:

• “Special education” means the following: Specially designed instruction, at no cost to the parents, to meet the unique needs of an exceptional child

• Each gifted child shall be permitted to test out of, or work at an individual rate, and receive credit for required or prerequisite courses, or both, at all grade levels, if so specified in that child鈥檚 individualized education program. Any gifted child may receive credit for college study at the college or high school level, or both. If a gifted child chooses to receive college credit, however, the student shall be responsible for the college tuition costs.

This arrangement would have been particularly useful for my family and might have kept my middle child from dropping out of high school when he wasn鈥檛 allowed to take the higher-level classes he wanted. I tried to enroll him in college but hit a bureaucratic wall when they wouldn鈥檛 accept him without a high school diploma, even though he scored higher on standardized tests than the average student the college accepted.

The majority of my fellow NYC parents were in favor of a similar statute for New York state.

鈥淎bsolutely! This is so necessary,鈥� cheered mother of three Laura B. 鈥淕ifted children definitely have special needs and they should be educated at the level they deserve. I fully support a bill like this for NYC.鈥� 

鈥淚t would be amazing if public school could provide material at [gifted kids鈥橾 level,鈥� sighed A.K. a mother of two, 鈥渋nstead of the cookie-cutter curriculum they shove down the throats of all students.鈥�

Elaine Daly, parent, social worker and school counselor, did express concerns about how these children would be identified. 鈥淲ould [the IEP assessment] be designed with the understanding that traditional tests are not the only standard of gifted?鈥�

A lack of qualified teachers is what worries mom Iona Baldini. 鈥淚鈥檓 concerned that schools don鈥檛 have teachers who can work with gifted kids. There are very few teachers that can meet gifted kids at their level. I think we need infrastructure and a different mindset to teach gifted students.鈥�

Gayle Doyle, a one-time gifted child herself, isn鈥檛 concerned. 鈥淧art of being gifted means that you are challenging and learning yourself. In fourth grade, our class implemented a 鈥渢est out鈥� for math. You took the test before the unit, and if you scored above a certain level, you didn鈥檛 have to go through that lesson and were given more advanced work to do independently. I tested out of all the units. I was able to go into the hallway during math lessons where I worked on more challenging math problems. It was completely self-led, the teachers only had to provide problems for me to work on, but there was no instruction. I found it better this way, and this was done a while ago without IEPs.鈥�

Finally, a parent who asked to be identified as KC sees another bright side to offering IEPs for gifted kids. 鈥淭here is a lot of prejudice against kids with an IEP by other parents. The number of times I鈥檝e heard them complain about having their “gen ed” kid being in a class with an IEP kid (like mine) is too disappointing to list. That鈥檚 because there鈥檚 an assumption that IEP always means my kids have a negative trait that will ‘hold their [kid] back.’ A law like this *might* help these parents realize that there are equally deserving IEP students who should have their skills nurtured.鈥�

Assessing students and implementing individualized education plans is an expense few school districts, especially NYC, which is losing enrollment 鈥� and thus funding 鈥� can afford. An obvious, cost-effective solution would be to offer a higher-level curriculum for all. This across the board upgrade should be enough for most of those currently considered 鈥渁dvanced.鈥� But pleas to that effect have fallen on deaf ears for decades. The curriculum is, instead, dumbed down, most recently with the as a graduation requirement. 

If the only way parents can get an appropriate education for their academically gifted child is by demanding the same “” currently only available to those classified as “” by the U.S. Department of Education, then that鈥檚 what they may need to resort to. I realize it would put extra strain on an already overtaxed system, and it would cost more. I would rather not go that route. It鈥檚 the worst possible option for everyone, families and schools, in terms of expense and effort. But it feels like NYC parents have been left with no alternatives.

The concentration of white and Asian students in advanced programs in public education has spawned a movement to dismantle gifted-and-talented programs, schools that require admissions exams and other advanced programs on the grounds that they promote racial and economic segregation. But in many instances, talented Black and Latino students stand to lose the most; the backlash against advanced education hurts the very students critics hope to help.

The best way to solve the controversy is to embrace both excellence and equity, supporting advanced learning but widening the range of students who can access it to better reflect public education鈥檚 rapidly diversifying enrollment. In a recent FutureEd report on the state of gifted education, , I outline five steps school systems can take to increase opportunity for capable learners and present some case studies describing how particular districts have done just that. 

Retire the word 鈥済ifted.鈥� Academic promise is not limited to a special few, and innate ability does not trump hard work in achieving success. Opening advanced learning to all who want to try as Arizona鈥檚 Gadsden Elementary District 32 does with accelerated math, unlocks young people鈥檚 potential. Gadsden dropped the word 鈥済ifted鈥� to bury stereotypes, more accurately reflect the nature of the programs and give hard work the privileged place it deserves. 鈥淲e are looking for kids at the higher end of proficiency and who want to do the work,鈥� says Homero Chavez, a guidance counselor who built Gadsden鈥檚 advanced program from the ground up.

Seek talent everywhere. Ideally, school systems screen all students at least once, preferably twice or more times, through their school careers for evidence they can take on advanced work. It鈥檚 also important for districts to use multiple measures to identify highly capable learners rather than rely on a single test or teacher recommendation. In New York City, Chancellor David Banks established a universal screening system in public preschools, where teachers were trained to recognize potential in every classroom by identifying high performers relative to their neighborhood peers and inviting their families to apply for their children to attend advanced classes. This is one example of a process called universal screening with local norms. New York preschoolers are screened again in second grade, with students scoring in the top 10% in English, social studies, math and science automatically invited to apply for advanced programs.

Front-load advanced learning. 鈥淪tarting a program for advanced learners in high school and hoping to achieve anything like equitable outcomes is simply not going to happen,鈥� says Jonathan Plucker, an expert on gifted education and a research professor at Johns Hopkins University and past president of the National Association for Gifted Children. Instead, provide opportunities for elementary and middle school students to advance and accelerate their learning. For example, North Carolina law requires the state鈥檚 highest-scoring third graders to receive advanced math coursework in fourth grade.  

End the scarcity mentality. Like many school districts around the country, Maryland鈥檚 Montgomery County Public Schools had not kept up with the times when it came to providing advanced learning. Despite a growing and demographically changing population, for many years the school district reserved these opportunities to just four magnet middle schools: two focused on humanities and two centered on math and science. After many stumbles, the district has landed on a promising formula: universal screening plus a race-neutral lottery for seats in the four magnet middle schools, coupled with expanded opportunities in its other middle schools. 鈥淲e鈥檝e made it a high priority to add advanced curriculum,鈥� says district spokesperson Christopher Cram. 鈥淸Parents] are making it known what they want. And we want to give it to them.鈥�

Provide appropriate instruction. Acceleration can take many forms, from rapid movement through individual courses to grade-skipping or early college enrollment. shows that one of the most effective ways to support advanced learners is to create flexible groups within classes, based on readiness, interest and potential. These can be reconfigured easily to reflect student growth and changing interests. However, the burden of keeping advanced learners engaged cannot fall entirely on classroom teachers. Classrooms frequently contain children at . Making high-quality materials available for teachers instructing academically capable students is than simply telling them to differentiate their curriculum on their own. 

Parents take note when their children express the interest, motivation and drive to learn more. Affluent families supply enrichment or opt for private education if they sense their children鈥檚 needs are not being met. Students from all walks of life are entitled to the same opportunities.

Michael and Diane sit down with Dr. Scott Barry Kaufman, a cognitive scientist, researcher, professor and author focused on intelligence, creativity and human potential. They discuss the importance of placing all students 鈥� not just those that are in gifted or special education programs 鈥� at the center of their learning. They also apply nuance to popular concepts in education psychology, consider how intelligence became taboo, and illustrate the importance of seeing the middle way and other sides of the issues. 

Listen to the episode below. A full transcript follows.

Diane Tavenner: Hey, Michael.

Michael Horn: Hey, Diane.

Diane Tavenner: I missed you a lot last episode. It’s good to have you back, and I appreciate that you continue to carry and balance a lot, so it’s good to be here with you.

Michael Horn: Yeah, it’s good to be back in conversation with you. I was really sad to miss the last conversation for multiple reasons, but this conversation was one I was really excited to be in, and so I did not want to miss it. And it’s also good to be back in a routine, because routines are important, but this conversation in particular, I think, is going to be really stimulating.

Diane Tavenner: Yeah, routines are so important. One of the many things I learned from my undergraduate degree in psychology, which is in many ways the foundation for how I think about learning and teaching and education. And so today, I am equally excited for the conversation we’re going to have with one of my favorite psychologists in the world, Dr. Scott Barry Kaufman. In addition to authoring nearly a dozen books and writing a really insightful and useful newsletter that I would recommend to everyone, he hosts the most popular psychology podcast called the Psychology Podcast, and he’s the founder of the Center for Human Potential, which says a lot about who he is and what he believes in. And they offer courses and opportunities to learn self-actualization coaching, which is something I’m sure we’ll get into in a few minutes, what that means and why it’s important. I could go on and on about Scott’s resume, but I want to actually get in and talk with him. So let me just say, what’s important for me, beyond all of that, is just his care and focus on doing work that actually impacts people’s lives and is meaningful and relevant, and in particular in schools and with young people. And so that is where we connected over a decade ago, I think, or somewhere around there.

Diane Tavenner: And his work has deeply influenced me and my work. So super grateful to have him here. And I know, Michael, you feel equally strong.

Michael Horn: Yeah. Well, Scott, I won’t keep singing your praises too long, but I want to do a little bit more adulation, because among all the things that Diane just mentioned, I also appreciate how, in social media, you are able to strike a nuanced balance in a medium that does not appreciate nuance, and yet you’re able to be popular still. And that’s something we care about deeply in this conversation. Like Diane and I are always trying to find the nuance. We’re always trying to find third ways between polarized viewpoints. And I know we’re going to tackle some big topics today in not nearly the time that they deserve, from self-actualization to growth mindset to intelligence. But I just always appreciate how you tackle these topics, and you move beyond the average into the nuance so seamlessly. So, Scott, I will stop being a total fanboy, but just really excited to see you guys.

Scott Barry Kaufman: It is such an honor to be here. I love you guys, and I feel like I need to invite you two on my podcast someday.

Diane Tavenner: Well, we’re happy to do that. And so let’s open the conversation with something that I love, which is, you wrote a manifesto. I think a lot of people think about writing a manifesto, but you actually wrote one. This isn’t just any manifesto. It’s a manifesto on human-centered education.

Scott Barry Kaufman: Yeah.

Diane Tavenner: And so let’s just start there. Tell us about your beliefs, which I think really go to the core of what is the purpose of education, which is something Michael and I talk about all the time.

Scott Barry Kaufman: Yeah. Thank you so much for bringing that up. I think I’m unwaveringly humanistic in my, like, I really am unflappable about this. All around me, I’ll see non humanistic approaches, and I just try not to get caught up in the vortex of those tsunamis. I stay in my own path. I really believe firmly that all students should be treated as human first. And it’s a very simple principle that has very deep implications. Yet it is mind-bogglingly not the central principle of education. There’s such a focus on results first, or whatever it be now. It’s not SAT now because SAT has been banned everywhere. But they’re still thinking about, well, what other results should we look to? It’s still results focused in a sort of standardized way. They just move the goalpost from one standardized goalpost to another, to come up with a metaphor that doesn’t make any sense. But anyway, you knew what I meant. So I just think that that frustrates me, because I think there’s so much greater potential that students have. They can display to us if we treat them as a whole person and we view sort of a needs-based approach where we recognize that to be human comes with certain basic needs as well as growth needs. I don’t think either security needs or growth needs are being met in schools. And then it is a legitimate question, what should be in the purview of education. And I think that’s an interesting question, too, but I would argue the human part belongs, somewhat at least.

Diane Tavenner: Yeah, I think Michael’s going to take us more in that direction in a moment. But before we go there, is it useful to just sort of define self-actualization. Like, what does that mean to you? And how should we鈥nd I know you have a beautiful metaphor that you use, but I think that would be helpful to folks.

Scott Barry Kaufman: Oh, sure. Absolutely. So there are other buzzwords that are popular these days, like happiness and achievement are the two biggest ones I see over and over again in the education world. But I think self-actualization has a different flavor. It sort of vibrates on a different frequency than either happiness or achievement. It’s something else. It’s not a word that’s used much these days. It was used a lot in the pot-smoking sixties. And I’m trying to put it on a scientific foundation for anyone who will listen to me. I’m trying to put it on the science of self-actualization. And show that we can measure certain characteristics that bring us closer to realizing the best within us, sort of our highest potential, our unique creative potential. And that’s really all. I think of it as. What is your unique creative contribution or unique creative potential? It’s not as flowery and spiritual sounding as it sounds. That’s all I mean, and that is something different, though, than happiness and achievement. You can actually be realizing your unique creative potential. And have a lot of meaning in your life, but not particularly feel happy a lot. And we need to teach people that’s okay. You know, we have a lot of young people who are obsessed with just feeling good all the time and are colossal assholes to know.

Michael Horn: No, but it’s so interesting to hear you say that, Scott. And your writing on this has been so foundational to my thinking about it. And I’d love you to just translate that, because I think you gave a good overview of sort of what not to optimize for in education. And maybe started to hint at, you know, if we’re thinking about the unique contributions of each individual as a human being. So, what, in your mind, might that look like from the experiences? And we can stay broad strokes, but just thinking about young kids in elementary school through middle and high school, I imagine it changes over time. What are the sorts of experiences that you think school ought to have for students?

Scott Barry Kaufman: Yeah, great question. So I come at a lot of this through the pathway of trying to reconceptualize gifted education and special education. So let me just say my roots in this. My first book over a decade ago was called Ungifted: Intelligence Redefined. Where I argued for reconceptualization of human intelligence. I called it the theory of personal intelligence. Now I’m calling it the theory of self-actualizing intelligence because that’s more in line with everything I’m doing right now. But that’s really what I was arguing for, was saying, like, look, we treat these gifted kids as though they’re the only ones capable or not they’re capable. They’re the only ones who would benefit from enrichment. It’s like, what? A lot of them aren’t even benefiting from whatever the 鈥渆nrichment鈥� they’re giving in gifted education classes, which is nothing very valuable to even the gifted kids. But I really think that there’s also this false dichotomy we have that you’re either learning disabled on one hand or gifted on the other hand, or you’re in this third category, mainstream education, where you’re just supposed to fly by the seat of your pants. That’s it. You got nothing special, you got no excuses. I think that’s just like, wow, what a weird system we have in K-12, where that’s the way the world looks. And I really believe, in terms of experiences, I think we can democratize a lot of the spirit of how we treat gifted kids, but democratize that towards everyone. But we view it through the lens not of achievement. We view gifted kids as though their goal is to then go out and create Facebook, like that’s their only purpose, or to get in Harvard and then pay back the endowment someday. But I feel like people are worth more than that as humans. And democratizing gifted education in a way where the lens of self-actualization for everyone, I think, just completely changes the goalpost, because every student viewed through the lens of self-actualization, you’d treat them the same way in terms of experiences. Maybe the experience would be different, but in terms of the sort of flavor of the experience is that we try to emphasize project-based learning. I mean, this is鈥iane’s, no stranger to a lot of the experiences I’m going to mention right now, being a legend when it comes to creating just these kinds of experiences. I remember when Diane gave me a tutorial in the Facebook headquarters. I don’t know if I’m allowed to say that. I don’t know if that was like a top-secret meeting, but you can edit that out if I wasn’t allowed to say that. But just individualizing things – in a way where this may sound a little 鈥渨oo-woo鈥� – but honoring the sacredness of each child’s unique self-actualization journey is something really special. And why do we only honor that if you’re, quote, gifted, and then we don’t even really honor that. What we do is we put so much pressure on you to perform and be gifted. 鈥淥h, you’re gifted now be gifted.鈥� And then a lot of these鈥hen there’s a whole field of gifted education on underachieving gifted students, which I think is a ridiculous term in itself. I’ve argued that we need to get rid of the word underachieving because then that implies that there are ungifted kids who are overachieving. And I’m like, what the hell does that mean? Biological opposites. There’s just so much. I don’t know. I feel like I’m a little quirky. I’m a little odd. I just see things differently. But this is just the way I see it. It’s ridiculous the kind of system we set up. And I do think we can create experiences that give a vitality or an aliveness not just to school but to life.

Diane Tavenner: Yeah. So much of what you’re saying, Scott. I think, I’m sure people who know what we talk about and are connecting that to the work that I do, they’ll see it in what you’re saying. We use some different words. We use personalization and things like that. But this idea that each individual human has their own, they’re a unique human that will develop into this world. And if we help them develop, they’re going to make a contribution. And none of us know what that is. And it will be very, if we do it well, it will be widely varied. Right. And that’s the beauty of the world and the human experience. Another thing that I incorporate a lot into my work – or have over the years – is this idea of growth mindset and this concept. And you’ve done some really fascinating interviews recently with Carol Dweck, and you’re doing some writing about this. And as Michael said, one of the things that often happens to practitioners is we hear these competing ideas from the science and then we don’t know what to make of it. And I don’t think that’s where you’re going here with growth mindset. You have some really interesting comments, but I don’t think you’re saying throw the baby out with the bathwater. Help us get the nuance of growth mindset that we should be understanding.

Scott Barry Kaufman: I think I can get right to the core of the nuance there with a quote from Maslow: 鈥淲hat’s not worth doing is not worth doing well.鈥� And that just explains my whole critique of growth mindset theory. But still, of course, not throwing the baby out with the bathwater. What tends to happen is that wonderful researchers – I consider them my friends, like Angela Duckworth and Carol Dweck – they will do a lot of hard-earned research and will present a construct, but then educators will treat it like it’s the greatest thing since sliced bread and will apply it indiscriminately to everything without any appreciation of context. I saw it happen not just with growth mindset, but I saw it happen with grit. It’s just like, 鈥淥h my God, you have entire schools that are now around grit. Grit is the only thing that matters in the school.鈥� And it’s like, why is grit the only thing that matters? I don’t think Angela would ever say that. Angela is a wonderfully nuanced human, and she would never argue that. It’s just ridiculous how much we can focus so much on. And so I think blind grit, as I’ve called it, or blind growth mindset鈥ou can have growth mindset, mindset up the wazoo for things that aren’t right for you, and then why should we be rewarding that? You applied your growth mindset to that? I make the distinction between growth mindset and growth motivation. In my self-actualization program, we really focus on growth motivation. We really don’t talk about growth mindset at all because I think that can come from a growth motivation when you are intrinsically motivated to grow in a certain direction based on what is really right for you or right for your soul. Again, sorry, pardon me if I sound woo woo here, but I do think there is something. There’s a capital self soul, whatever the meditation people far before psychology ever existed, as a field pointed out, when you’re really, really in touch with that, you can’t help but have a growth mindset. That’s like an outcome of a growth motivation. But when you lead with growth mindset without the soul involved, I don’t think that’s anything to be applauded.

Michael Horn: Super interesting, Scott, because hearing you say that reminds me also of sort of the research around motivation more generally. It鈥檚 not just your belief in, 鈥淐an I accomplish the goal?鈥� it’s the 鈥淚s it a goal worth accomplishing?鈥� And to me, and not to some other person, but to me. And so it sounds like it comes from there. The other thing I’ve taken from some of your conversations, and I want to try this out on you and see if it makes sense, is in one of the conversations you had with Carol, she did and you did talk about how she could have like a low dosage intervention, a 45 minutes or a couple of times sort of tutorial, if you will, on growth mindset. And it could produce 鈥� I鈥檓 going to mess it up – but I think a 0.15 standard deviation of impact. And she’s like, this is a huge thing. But then I think your observation was that it could be undermined by other characteristics, like if the teacher didn’t really believe in growth鈥nd I’ll try to use growth motivation for this conversation. Or something I think a lot about is that the system often undermines these views of growth. So in a time-based education system or a zero-sum education system, I can tell you all about growth mindset or growth motivation all I want. But at the end of the day, if at the end of a three-week unit, we all move on to the next one, regardless of the effort you’ve put in, regardless of learning, and I label you a C student, or something, I’ve just shot in the foot everything I was preaching in my 45-minute intervention. And so in some ways, the environment, I think, deeply undermines any of these things, intentionally or unintentionally. But maybe I’m misunderstanding you. I sort of wanted to paint that scenario and get you to react.

Scott Barry Kaufman: Context matters. And in the more recent updated papers that Carol has written, to be fair to Carol, she makes that very clear. I have a Substack newsletter and I did a really deep, deep reference list with a deep dive. Yeah, it’s really nerdy. I wanted to lay it all out there to show I don’t have an agenda. I think that’s something that’s a little bit quirky about me. Is that with any of this, I don’t have an agenda. I have beliefs based on evidence. But I can always be changed and my beliefs can change. Although I did, earlier, say 鈥淚 firmly believe.鈥� I do firmly believe things, but even those can be changed. But when you look at the full research literature in the past five years on growth mindset, everyone agrees: context matters. Everyone agrees. When we’re not talking about you’re trying to sell a best-selling book and the publicity machine isn’t behind it鈥he publicity machine doesn’t care at all about the truth. It cares about what it cares鈥t has its own goals. The publicity ecosystem has its own goals. But if your goal is truth, everyone agrees. If you read Carol’s response to the critics鈥 posted a paper that her David Yeager, I think that’s his name, David Yeager, who’s also a star superstar in this world. Really heartfelt. He has a really heartfelt love of this work. He does. And he really wants to help others. And I’ve talked to him. And so I can say that to be the case, he’s a big influencer.

Diane Tavenner: Of my work as well.

Scott Barry Kaufman: Amazing. Yeah. I have nothing but massive respect for all these people, but I am a nerd. At the end of the day, I really want to know the truth. I don’t like BS. I don’t like a lot of fat around things. I want to be like, no what is the data? And everyone agrees, when they wrote their response paper to the critics, they agreed. In the response paper, they said underserved populations tend to benefit more from growth mindset interventions than upper-class rich people. And you look at the little nuances, teacher effectiveness matters. Like, you can have a terrible teacher teaching growth mindset, and that’s not as effective an intervention than a good teacher. So you start adding in these really important nuances and it adds up to a much more nuanced picture.

Michael Horn: Let’s go to the other topic that you’ve spent a lot of time on researching: intelligence. You’ve done a lot of work on the construct of intelligence and general IQ and such. And at least in my experience, educators are often uncomfortable with the notion that a general IQ or something like that might exist. And of course, there’s lots of other works around intelligence. There’s Howard Gardner’s multiple intelligences. There’s stuff on emotional intelligence, Peter Salovey, others. And some people will then throw arrows at those folks. I think for our audience, it would be useful for you to give a bit of a landscape around the research around intelligence and what are the implications for educators here.

Scott Barry Kaufman: I mean, how much time do you have?

Michael Horn: We鈥檒l let you stretch out a little bit.

Scott Barry Kaufman: Yeah, I’m a little bit on the Asperger spectrum, so if you get me started on a passion topic, I can’t stop talking. So this is particularly鈥hile everyone else was dating in grad school, I was in the library, literally going through every book in the intelligence book section. So I’m obsessed with that question you asked. Well, Robert Sternberg, for instance, he was my advisor in grad school.

Michael Horn : Oh, wow.

Scott Barry Kaufman: And I was accepted to work with Howard Gardner as well at Harvard. So I had to make that choice. Do I work with Robert Sternberg or Howard Gardner? No offense to Howard Gardner, I chose to be in a psychology department as opposed to a school of education. But they both influenced me greatly when I was an undergraduate and I was reading their works because I really felt like it rang true that there is something, there is more to intelligence than what’s measured on IQ tests. And that to me was a very important insight. They both differ in what that 鈥渕ore鈥� is, but they both argue that IQ tests are missing out on a lot of what it is to be intelligent. I would argue that it misses out a lot of what it means to be human. And that’s a little bit of a different argument. That’s sort of the direction I’ve gone in that’s different than both of them just giving you a sort of context. And where do I sit in this whole thing? Yeah. So they really focus on extending the abilities, right? Both of them. It’s abilities they’re extending, but I’m trying to extend beyond ability to passion and to the domain of motivation. So that was my…I hope people view that as a contribution to the field of intelligence and the field of gifted education. I reported on a statistic over a decade ago that boggled my mind. [Out of] almost every gifted education program in the country, only one considers motivation an important part of the identification process for giftedness. And so that blew my mind because talent and motivation, to me, are inextricably intertwined. Ability and motivated, whatever you want to call it, talent, ability, intelligence, whatever the heck you want to call it, they are so inextricably intertwined. A lot of pop books like to say talent is overrated. You could sell a lot of copies of books [with that]. If you say talent is overrated, I think talent is underrated. And what I mean by that鈥aybe I’ll write the book someday: Talent Is Underrated. I actually am thinking about that. It sounds cheeky. And someone might say, 鈥淲ell, how, Scott? Wait. How could you say that? Aren’t you making the argument? What?鈥� My argument is that, no, talent is really important, but in a different way than people think. I don’t believe that it should be threatening to others if someone has an innate talent. I think that we should have a school system where everyone’s unique talents and its linkages to their own motivations and goals are appreciated. And we’re not anywhere near that. We’re cutting SAT programs. We’re terrified of talent in the name of. 鈥淒on’t open up this can in the name of equity.鈥� We’ve said excellence just doesn’t matter at all. I believe you can have equity and excellence. Don’t get me wrong. I’m not a monster, but I’m just saying it’s like everyone’s one way or the other in their thinking these days, and we need more of a 鈥渂oth and鈥� way of thinking. I think that excellence has fallen by the wayside in this. We’re terrified to admit that intelligence matters or that there are talents. I would rather broaden the notion of talent to include motivation but not get rid of or ignore talent as a concept that’s important or intelligence as a concept that’s important. There are obvious individual differences in various dimensions, and you can sweep them under the rug as much as you want to in the name of equity and say, like, 鈥淥h, everyone is exactly the same. We’re communism.鈥� But no matter how hard you try to do that, good luck. People’s soul is still going to yearn for expression no matter what you do.

Diane Tavenner: Something that’s coming up for me right now is, I know we’re getting to a place where we probably need to close, but, Scott, you’ve touched on it a bunch.

Scott Barry Kaufman: It got me started.

Diane Tavenner: It feels like it’s okay to share. One of the things that I think the two of us have connected on over the years is a sort of common experience as children in education. For me personally, I may have touched on this before, but I was tested for special education, and I was denied access to gifted programs, and that then put me in that middle mainstream that you’re talking about. Tons of context was missing. I was in a home that was physically and emotionally abusive, and there was all this stuff going on. And to your point, inside of me as a little girl, I knew that I was highly motivated. There鈥檚 things of me that needed to be expressed and come out and always felt like they were sort of hampered or blocked by the system. And I got lucky along the way that a few people believed in me in ways. And I know you have a very similar story that we have really resonated…that influences how we see education in the system and the purpose of it. And so I just feel like that’s coming out. We’re just scratching the surface of how it comes out in your work and your willingness to be nuanced and to not sort of just accept these big concepts and have a polarized conversation, but actually dig in on what the implications and what they mean at deeper levels.

Scott Barry Kaufman: Absolutely. I just tweeted something just a couple of minutes ago – not鈥inutes before our interview, that’d be awkward 鈥� [that] said, while extremists certainly think they are the most knowledgeable in the room, there’s a new massive worldwide study across 44 different nations that found that moderates are actually the most knowledgeable about politics. But I think that this applies to anything – educators as well. I think that the loudest voice in the room isn’t necessarily the most knowledgeable.

Diane Tavenner: So many things for us to take away. But I think the one that I really want to focus in on as we wrap is your willingness to have your mind changed. So to hold strong perceptions and opinions about what you’re doing today, but then being open to what the evidence is going to say and what more you can learn.

Scott Barry Kaufman: I’ll give you an example of that real quick. I went into the field thinking I was taking down IQ. Gardner, Stern[berg], that was my starting place. And carving my own unique space has been a journey because I started to do traditional IQ research with Nicholas McIntosh at University of Cambridge, published articles on IQ with IQ test constructors, like, sort of went to the dark side, of what I had originally viewed as the dark side, and realized that there is a lot of nuance to this stuff. The field of human intelligence is actually a really rich, interesting, exciting field. The genetics, the neuroscience, the interactions between genetics and the environment and even lead and how much that can affect environmental factors, epigenetic expressions. It’s such a rich, rich field. And then to just make some blanket statements like 鈥淚Q bad,鈥� I don’t know. What will they say is good? IQ bad – what’s good? I don’t know. What’s the opposite of IQ? 鈥淏eing dumb, good.鈥� Let’s promote dumbness in society now. I think that there just is a lot of鈥ut that’s one example, anyway, of how my mind changed over the years, because I did start off thinking in a simplistic way and my own approach. Now, I literally said, talent is underrated. I said that. Scott Barry Kaufman said that. I would never have said that when I started off in my career. There was a book, I think it was called Talent Is Overrated. Yeah, that’s actually the title of the book, and that was one of my bibles, along with Howard Gardner’s book and Sternberg’s book. And so that would have been my sort of proselytizing to everyone is that talent’s overrated. 鈥漌e need to ignore talent.鈥� And my nuance is that I’m saying, 鈥淣o, actually, I think we can hold in our mind multiple things at once that talent really exists.鈥� I watched this five-year-old prodigy playing Rockmanoff on YouTube the other day. Well, you want to say, 鈥淟et’s cancel any program to help nurture that kid, because we’re all鈥ith enough grit, with enough growth mindset鈥�

Michael Horn: We can all do that.

Scott Barry Kaufman: We can all do that? Like, no, no, we can’t. Sorry.

Michael Horn: Wow.

Scott Barry Kaufman: Do you know what I’m saying?

Diane Tavenner: I totally know what you’re saying. And the only thing I would add on to it, and then I’ll turn it over to Michael to bring us home, is, I believe there’s something in every single human. There is talent in every single human, and that’s what we should be searching for and enabling to come out, because we just have such a limited view on what is valued and what talent is. And so the companion to that is the expansion of appreciation and definition of talent.

Scott Barry Kaufman: Well, that’s it. You nailed it. I think we’re all on the same page.

Michael Horn: I think that’s right. And I love taking that from this conversation. It’s more helping the individual express what’s meaningful to them and how they can make a contribution to the broader society. So, Scott, as we wrap up, Diane and I have little tradition where we give folks a little bit of a window into things we’re watching for pleasure or reading for pleasure, whatever. It might be, often not related to work. Sometimes it is related to work, because Diane and I are nerds, and I love that about you. It’s hard for us to strip that away. So, yeah, if we could put you on the spot, what’s something you’re writing or, excuse me, listening to? Watching? Reading?

Scott Barry Kaufman: Sure. So I’m absolutely obsessed right now with the field of mentalism, which is a subset of magic. And I practice now about 8 hours a day. And I created an Instagram. I’m the amazing Dr. Scott.

Michael Horn: Okay, we’ll follow.

Scott Barry Kaufman: A year or two from now, look out. I want to actually maybe move into doing some gigs and things. I’m going to set up a table on the beach path here in Santa Monica. I can read your mind. I think it’s a nice fusion of my psychology background. Anyway, that’s what I’m into. Yeah.

Michael Horn: Diane, what about you?

Diane Tavenner: Well, I’m going to change up today, because this conversation has brought back to me a short story that I’ve read many times that is just so related to what we’re talking about. It’s a Kurt Vonnegut short story called Harrison Bergeron. And if you haven’t read it, it just epitomizes what we’re talking about in this conversation. So highly recommend. Very provocative and interesting. How about you, Michael?

Michael Horn: Very cool. Well, I confess I’ve been in such a state of mind with my family. Scott, my father-in-law passed away, so he was mildly on the Asperger’s spectrum as well, and had all these handwriting patents and recognition. He would read people’s personalities through their handwriting. Really fun stuff.

Scott Barry Kaufman: I love this guy.

Michael Horn: Amazing individual helped build the initial Thinkpad by IBM. But as a result, though, I’ve been unable to read or watch much the last few weeks. And so I’ve been going deep on just Australian Open tennis because that’s my happy place. And as a result, the Two-Minute Tennis channel on YouTube because I’ve been reconstructing my backhand. And even though I haven’t been able to play as much as I wanted to, little two-minute tips here just to sort of allow me to get better at that. So it’s not magic or mentalism, but this has been my little escape. So for folks who are also avid tennis players, subscribe to the Two-Minute Tennis channel, but also subscribe to Scott’s podcast, the psychology podcast. And Scott, thanks for joining us. And all of you listening, thanks for joining us, as always, on Class Disrupted.

The March 2023 paper asserted:

We found students to be astonishingly similar in estimated learning rate鈥�. One may be tempted by everyday experience to suggest there is obvious wide variability in how fast different people learn鈥�. Such differences may be alternatively explained not as differences in learning rate but as differences in the number of quality learning opportunities individuals experience鈥�. Thus we can gain insight into whether student competence differences derive more from environmental opportunity differences or student-inherent learning-rate differences.

When I first read the above, I instantly thought of one of my own 鈥渆veryday experiences.鈥� When my sons were 8 and 12 years old, I won a private coding tutorial at my daughter鈥檚 preschool auction. I had intended it for my oldest son, a budding artist. I thought he might enjoy creating computer animations. At the last minute, I asked if my second grader could sit in.

The lesson lasted an hour. At the end, the instructor called me over and whispered, 鈥淵our older son understood everything I said. Your younger one really got 颈迟!鈥�

My impression, as a result, was that in this particular field, my younger child had greater aptitude and thus learned faster. (He went on to teach himself and began working professionally as a programmer in middle school.)

Yet, according to the study, having a 鈥渒nack for math鈥� or a 鈥済ift for language鈥� is a myth.

To prove this, the researchers employed a methodology that included teaching a cross-section of students a new skill via 鈥渆ducational technologies (which) provide favorable learning conditions 鈥� including intelligent tutoring systems, educational games and online courses.鈥�

Their conclusion was that learning is not a matter of faster cognition on the part of some students, but 鈥渄ifferences in the number of quality learning opportunities individuals experience.鈥�

This ran counter to my aforementioned 鈥渆veryday experience.鈥� My sons lived in the same household, suggesting few 鈥渆nvironmental opportunity differences,鈥� not to mention the same exposure to 鈥渜uality learning opportunities.鈥� Furthermore, if our household was indeed privileged to include an above-average number of 鈥渜uality learning opportunities鈥� that enabled my younger son to pick up coding at an accelerated rate, shouldn鈥檛 my first child 鈥� being four years older 鈥� have been exposed to a higher number of them and thus able to learn coding faster than his little brother? 

To answer such a question for any parent who has raised more than one child, the study鈥檚 authors clarify:

This debate comes down to whether learning rate per practice opportunity is relatively constant across individuals or whether it varies substantially鈥�. Bloom suggested that 鈥渕ost students become very similar with regard to 鈥� rate of learning 鈥� when provided with favorable learning conditions鈥�…. 

In other words:

Learners in more favorable conditions learn at a more rapid rate than those in less favorable conditions.

Perhaps, even though we thought we had raised our two sons in a very similar manner, our oldest 鈥� rather than benefiting from an extra four years of 鈥渜uality learning opportunities鈥� 鈥� had instead been the victim of our four years of amateur parenting. His younger brother, on the other hand, reaped the benefits not only of having more experienced parents, but also of being exposed to our interactions with the oldest, thus only appearing to be more advanced because, at age 8, he鈥檇 been adjacent to learning opportunities meant for a 12-year-old.

On the one hand, as someone who has spent decades insisting that all American children are capable of doing much more complex work than the system currently offers them, I am thrilled that this study agreed:

Our evidence suggests that given favorable learning conditions for deliberate practice and given the learner invests effort in sufficient learning opportunities, indeed, anyone can learn anything they want. This implication is good news for educational equity 鈥� as long as our educational systems can provide the needed favorable conditions and can motivate students to engage in them. 

On the other hand, as someone who has spent decades advocating to unshackle grade level from a child鈥檚 age and allow all students to learn at their own pace, I am terrified that the wrong lesson will be drawn from this study. That those who seek to shut down, or, at least, water down, gifted-and-talented classes and accelerated education will use it as proof that there is no such thing as a quick learner; ergo, there is no need for programs that meet their needs. 

When I mentioned my fears to my husband, a math and physics teacher and alum of such NYC 鈥済ifted鈥� schools as and Stuyvesant High, he reframed my concerns.

鈥淣o,鈥� he said. 鈥淭his is actually good news. This study proves that students come into a classroom with different levels of background knowledge.鈥�

And differences in 鈥渂ackground knowledge,鈥� as the study confirms, is precisely what produces the 鈥渄ifferences in learning rate.鈥�

鈥淏ackground knowledge is something that can be measured,鈥� my husband went on. 鈥淲hich means it can be used to place students in the appropriate learning level for them.鈥�

If this report is accurate and learning speed is determined purely by what a student already knew coming into a fresh task, then we can ditch labels like 鈥済ifted鈥� and 鈥渟low鈥� and focus solely on what any individual needs in order to learn. We can provide everyone with the 鈥渘eeded favorable conditions.鈥� We can ensure that all students, regardless of socioeconomic status, can learn the same material. Good news, indeed!
But will that be the lesson that those who make education policy draw? Or will they simply see the headline dismissing the concept of a 鈥渜uick learner鈥� and double down on the current 鈥渙ne size fits all鈥� schooling model? Will they continue teaching each student in exactly the same way, not taking into consideration 鈥渂ackground knowledge鈥�… or anything else? That would be bad news. For everybody.

Georgia鈥檚 program for gifted students has problems with too-large class sizes, teacher training and student selection, a new from the state auditor鈥檚 office finds.

In the 2020-2021 school year, about 199,000 Georgia students were designated as gifted, representing about 12% of the 1.7 million statewide student body. The state Department of Education says these students need 鈥渟pecial instruction and/or special ancillary services to achieve at levels commensurate with his or her ability(ies).鈥�

To help make sure they get that instruction, the state spends between 30% and 68% more on each gifted student based on Georgia鈥檚 Quality Basic Education formula for per-student spending. That makes the gifted program the largest non-general education program funded according to the formula.

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for 蜜桃影视 Newsletter

Class sizes and instruction methods

Gifted funding is based on a ratio of 12 students per teacher, but the auditors found more than 77% of gifted classes across the state exceeded 12 students, and gifted classes averaged 23 students per teacher. That means that the state is paying a higher rate for gifted students but may not be reaping the intended benefits of more individual instruction for gifted students, the auditors found.

Gifted coordinators told auditors that a lack of resources can lead to larger classes.

The auditors found that this issue was exacerbated in larger school systems 鈥� Georgia鈥檚 36 school systems with more than 10,000 students had an average of 23 gifted students per teacher, while 11 systems with less than 1,000 students had an average of 12 students per teacher.

The auditors recommended that the General Assembly should consider tweaking funding for gifted students in discussions about altering QBE, and the state Department of Education should periodically review gifted class sizes.

The DOE agreed with these findings but added 鈥淕eorgia is a local control state, which allows school districts to choose which gifted service delivery model(s) best serve the students in the various grade bands. For all QBE categories, school districts earn funding based on a formula but are afforded flexibility per state law.鈥�

The DOE also noted that the 1:12 ratio is the formula for funding, not a limit, and that local districts can waive class sizes under state law.

But different methods of teaching may prevent gifted students from receiving individualized attention, the auditors found.

The DOE allows eight models for gifted instruction, including resource classes, in which students are pulled out of classes one day a week for a class that can only include gifted students. Seventy percent of Georgia gifted elementary students have at least one resource class.

Other methods include cluster grouping, in which six to eight gifted students are placed in an otherwise general education classroom led by a teacher with a gifted endorsement who provides different lesson plans for both groups, and collaborative teaching, which is similar to cluster grouping, but the classroom is led by a teacher without gifted certification who is assisted in lesson planning by a teacher with certification.

Statewide, 40% of gifted elementary school students were enrolled in a class with cluster grouping and 12% had at least one collaborative teaching class.

The National Association for Gifted Children says gifted students should receive differentiated instruction 鈥� lessons that give them the opportunity to be challenged and grow their skills 鈥� and general education services should not replace differentiated instruction provided by models like the resource class.

鈥淐luster and Collaborative models, however, are at higher risk of lacking differentiation because students may have a broad array of skills in the same classroom,鈥� the auditors found.

The education department disagreed with the audit鈥檚 recommendations to review class data and work with districts to ensure differentiation, noting that 鈥淕eorgia is a local control state, which allows school districts to choose which gifted service delivery model(s) best serve the students in the various grade bands.鈥�

Teacher training

The education department requires gifted classes to be led by teachers with gifted in-field endorsements, certificates which typically require nine to 12 hours of college credits, equaling about 200 hours of coursework, which can be expensive and time-consuming for working teachers.

The courses and field work are designed to allow teachers to nurture students鈥� talents and provide them with appropriately challenging work, but auditors found 7,500 of 76,000 gifted classes in the 2020-2021 school year were taught by teachers without an endorsement.

The auditors found that rural districts were more likely to have higher percentages of teachers without the endorsement, but there were also other outliers, including one suburban system in which 805 classes, half of the total gifted classes, were taught by teachers without a record of an endorsement. Only 34 systems, or about 20%, had all gifted classes taught by an endorsed teacher.

That means the state may have overpaid up to $9.7 million to gifted classes without a certified gifted teacher, the auditors estimated.

The auditors also found that about 3,800 students, about 2% of children in gifted classes, were not identified as eligible for the program and that the state may have paid an additional $3.6 million for gifted classes for ineligible students.

The education department partially agreed with the auditors鈥� recommendations to handle these discrepancies and said new policies are already in place starting this school year, but they noted that most of the data was collected during a time when the pandemic was at its height, which limited opportunities to attain endorsements.

Student selection and instruction

The auditors also found fault with schools鈥� processes for selecting students.

One problem they listed was that the DOE does not require screening all students for gifted status, which they said may cause students to miss out, especially those in disadvantaged groups.

Students can be referred by teachers, counselors or others with knowledge of their academic abilities, or they can be automatically referred if they score high on standardized tests. Referred students are reviewed by a panel, and, if approved, can be enrolled subject to parental approval.

But eligibility declines as poverty levels increase, the researchers found, and Asian and white students are overrepresented in gifted programs compared with members of other races, both in Georgia and nationally. The researchers noted that most school systems do provide universal screening, but that it is not required as it is in other states.

The National Association for Gifted Children recommends universal screening as well as steps including training for general education teachers to recognize gifted students early and providing information to parents in multiple languages.

The education department partially agreed with the auditors鈥� recommendations, saying it would be willing to incorporate universal screening guidance into its best practices if it were 鈥渁dded in state law and with additional appropriated state funding.鈥�

is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Georgia Recorder maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor John McCosh for questions: info@georgiarecorder.com. Follow Georgia Recorder on and .

The course is 鈥淐loudy With a Chance of Science,鈥� and James Ramirez places his hand-fashioned tin foil boat into a bin of water, squealing with excitement as he discovers it floats. The first grader and his classmates are learning about density by testing how many pebbles each students鈥� contraption will hold before it sinks.

Ramirez tosses in every stone from his first handful 鈥� quickly surpassing the class record of five pebbles 鈥� and rushes back for more as his boat remains above water. The child, who is reserved and hasn鈥檛 spoken yet this period, keeps adding weight, laughing and wriggling his shoulders with each successful placement.

鈥溾��27, 28, 29鈥︹�� 

He has the attention of the class now and his peers count with him.

鈥�…42, 43, 44鈥︹��

With each pebble, Ramirez is doing more than proving he crafted a sturdy ship. He is accomplishing something educators across the country are anxiously hoping he and millions of students like him can do: accelerate their learning to get back on track after COVID.

The first grader is one of 481 youngsters enrolled in Baltimore鈥檚 Emerging Scholars program this summer and one of over 15,000 students participating in no-cost summer learning opportunities through Baltimore City Schools. Thanks to COVID relief funds, the 77,800-student district is serving more than twice as many young people as its pre-pandemic max of 9,000, said Ronda Welsh, the district鈥檚 extended learning coordinator. 

Among the offerings are typical summer school options like credit recovery and career exploration, but also more specialized programs like debate, farm and forest camp, robotics and 鈥淔reedom Schools鈥� focused on Black history. The Emerging Scholars program stands out as a camp providing accelerated academic instruction, but with none of the cost or admission requirements typical of gifted programming.

鈥淥ur goal was to provide as many opportunities as we could for students in Baltimore,鈥� Welsh told 蜜桃影视. 鈥淲e wanted students to not only make progress academically, focusing on math and [English], but also the social-emotional aspect as well as enrichment.鈥�

Young people in and nationwide continue to score far below pre-pandemic levels in reading and math tests, with more severe deficits for high-poverty schools. Experts estimate it may take a half-decade to fully recover. Meanwhile, many officials pin their hopes on summer learning efforts like those in Baltimore to make up lost ground.

鈥淓specially because of COVID, the kids are a little behind,鈥� said Claudia Wiseman, a second-grade summer science instructor with Baltimore Emerging Scholars. During the school year, she鈥檚 an elementary special educator and said months of Zoom school have meant many young learners still lack basic skills like how to hold a pencil. The students she鈥檚 teaching now will be 鈥渁 little better prepared for second grade,鈥� she hopes.

It’s afternoon pickup time at the Emerging Scholars鈥� John Ruhrah Elementary School campus, and Ramirez鈥檚 mother Christy Miranda arrives. Staff tell her about her son鈥檚 latest feat: 63 pebbles.

Miranda beams. The program is helping the family recognize their son鈥檚 potential, unlocking academic capacities she didn鈥檛 realize he possessed.

鈥淗e鈥檚 learning a lot,鈥� she told 蜜桃影视. 鈥淚 didn鈥檛 know he had the ability to do so.鈥�

During the year, her son has few opportunities for rigorous coursework, she said, explaining that his school is 鈥渧ery defunded.鈥�

But this summer is different. Baltimore Emerging Scholars is a six-week gifted and talented program. In collaboration with , a global leader in gifted education, the camp provides high-level content in science, math and literacy to rising 1st  through 6th graders. 

鈥淒uring the regular year, [school] is just teachers rambling on about stuff I already know about 鈥� but this is new material,鈥� said rising fifth grader Basil Coleman. 鈥淚鈥檓 just having a great time here.鈥�

Unlike most other gifted programs, the camp doesn鈥檛 rely solely on test scores for eligibility but rather welcomes virtually any student who is up for the challenge. As a result, the cohort of students is more diverse than the group of students identified for gifted lessons during the academic year. Some 68% of summer students are Black, 14% are Hispanic, 9% are white and 3% are Asian 鈥� figures that closely resemble district-wide demographic averages.

Rae Lymer, who manages the program and reviews every student application, explained that anytime a student has a recorded assessment at or above grade level, it automatically qualifies the youngster for the program. If such a metric does not exist, the administrator calls families directly, looking for an alternative qualification such as if the applicant likes to ask lots of questions or thinks outside the box.

鈥淣inety-nine percent of the time, what I hear is, 鈥楳y kid is completely under-challenged and they’re not motivated by school and so that’s why you’re not seeing scores,鈥欌�� Lymer told 蜜桃影视, explaining that the program almost never turns away motivated students. 

Youth who choose to participate usually rise to the occasion, the data suggest. While the summer program does not yet have numbers on its academic impact, Emerging Scholars also runs afterschool offerings during the fall and spring. In 2020-21, the most recent data available, the share of participants testing at or above grade level increased 18 percentage points in reading and 39 percentage points in math over the course of the year.

鈥淲e鈥檙e learning advanced stuff and we鈥檙e able to get ahead,鈥� said 11-year-old Ama Amoateng, between stints on the playground during recess. 鈥淚t makes me feel smarter.鈥�

After engaging in the summer program, 鈥渕any of these kids will become identified [as gifted],鈥� anticipates Stacey Johnson, spokesperson for Johns Hopkins Center for Talented Youth. 鈥淚t鈥檚 reaching kids we wouldn鈥檛 otherwise reach.鈥�

Indeed, parent Torrey Parker said his daughter Skylar got 鈥渂umped up鈥� in reading and science last school year, which he believes was 鈥渁bsolutely鈥� because of the work she did in the program.

The rapid growth attests to what education scholars have long posited: That academic talent is equally distributed across all students without regard to race, class or gender 鈥� but that access to advanced learning opportunities are not. 

鈥淲e firmly believe that if opportunities are provided, students will flourish,鈥� said Lymer.

In one reading course focused on mystery novels, rising fifth graders are already 12 chapters into their third book in as many weeks and engaging in what their instructor called 鈥渄etective work鈥� to predict the ending. In another classroom, second graders concoct oobleck, a water and cornstarch mixture that has both solid and liquid properties, to learn about states of matter and 鈥渘on-Newtonian fluids.鈥� Down the hall in 鈥淭oyology,鈥� first graders study inertia and momentum by unleashing metal and plastic slinkies down a set of stairs.

A classroom of fifth graders peer down the lenses of microscopes at magazine cutouts of the letter 鈥渆,鈥� diagramming what they see at various magnification levels. It鈥檚 several students鈥� first time using a microscope and they鈥檙e surprised to find what one describes as 鈥渟tatic on a TV.鈥�

鈥淭hey were playing, but they were also learning,鈥� said Toyology instructor Tamika Robinson.

Even the students admit it鈥檚 a good time.

鈥淏ecause it鈥檚 called summer school, most of us thought it would be like school 鈥� but instead it鈥檚 a lot of activities and really engaging,鈥� said Brooke Bennett, 12.

Propelled, perhaps, by rave reviews, the camp has grown nearly three-fold since its 2019 launch and added about 35% new seats this year while transitioning back to in-person programming for the first time since COVID. Staffing challenges, which have of numerous summer programs across the country, haven鈥檛 posed a barrier for Emerging Scholars. In fact, two teachers rather than one work in each classroom under its co-teaching model.

鈥淢any of our teachers come back from year to year because they really respect and value their time with our program,鈥� said Lymer.

As the day winds down, a dozen rising first graders arrive at their last class, Social-Emotional Learning. Shoulders slouch and one student鈥檚 head is on his desk. They鈥檝e just watched a on how to keep a growth mindset and their instructor Brother Modlin wakes them up with some call-and-response. 

鈥淚t鈥檚 not 鈥業 can鈥檛 do it,鈥� is it class?鈥� He asks the question by trailing off. 鈥淚t鈥檚 鈥業 can鈥檛 do it鈥︹�欌��

鈥淵ET,鈥� they exclaim, picking up their heads and once again regaining attention.

Modlin works as a school counselor during the year, but was previously a therapist at a juvenile detention center in the city. 

鈥淢y whole thing as a counselor is about growth mindset,鈥� he told 蜜桃影视. 鈥淲e鈥檙e going to have bad situations, especially in Baltimore. 鈥� If I give them a growth mindset, they can rise out of any situation without depending on anyone but themselves.鈥�

The lessons are having an impact for 10-year-old Akorede Adekola.

鈥淚 feel really confident and relief [after SEL class],鈥� he said. 鈥淚 get to show my feelings and get it all out.鈥�

The program鈥檚 approach, coupling rigorous academic work with emotional supports, could be a promising model, believes fourth-grade instructor Michelle Brown-Christian. She scoffs at the idea that the curricula, fashioned for gifted children, should be reserved for only a select few.

鈥淭his could work for any child that wants to learn,鈥� she said.

What he did not reinstate was the qualifying test. Instead, all public school pre-K students would be screened by their classroom teachers, private school pre-K students who requested it would be evaluated by the city Department of Education, and children entering grades 1 through 3 would be evaluated via report cards 鈥� though parents were given no indication of how exactly those report cards would be used. Qualified students at every grade level would then be entered into a lottery, as there are always many more applicants than there are seats.

鈥淭he least DOE could have done was provide clarity,鈥� mom Maleeha Metla raged. 鈥淭hey randomly picked students? Lottery system? Tell parents how you got to the pool of kids getting the G&T offer!鈥�

Once placement results were announced Aug. 3, parents who assumed their children at least had a shot at being entered into the first-through-third-grade lottery for any available G&T seats were stunned to receive letters that the student had been declared 鈥渋neligible.鈥�

A mom who asked to only be identified as Jen said, 鈥淎 number of my friends are telling me that their kids were deemed ineligible but they don鈥檛 know why. Some of their kids had all 4s鈥� 鈥� the top grade on the student report card.

Dad Daniel McDermon couldn鈥檛 understand it, either, writing, 鈥淢y youngest was deemed not eligible, and I am rather shocked. My son scored 100% on the final math assessment, began the year reading at the end-of-year level and had 4s in reading and math on his final report card. He was deemed eligible for G&T programs two years ago by the DOE’s own test.鈥�

McDermon reached out to the department for clarification and received the following reply: The list of eligible students was determined using the following method: Students鈥� highest grade in each core subject was converted to a zero- through four-point scale. These core subject grades were averaged together for each student. Students within the school and grade-level were ranked based on this core subject average. Based on this ranking, the top 10% of students in your school and grade-level were identified as eligible. Report card grades were evaluated based on the most recent marking period available in April 2022.

Parents immediately cried foul 鈥� for a variety of reasons.

鈥淔or public school kids, the DOE chose to look at non-final grades from April, not the final grades filed in late June. On the other hand, for private, parochial and charter students, parents were instructed to submit their child’s grades 鈥� by July 1,鈥� wrote a different Jen. 鈥淚f my child was in private school, I could have submitted, and her eligibility would have been determined based on, final grades (all 4s) she received in late June. Instead, because she is already in public school, her non-final grades were used, making her ineligible.鈥�

A parent who is also a teacher fumed, 鈥淵ou can鈥檛 compare kids in different semesters! Everyone knows that June is your best report card because teachers/schools want to demonstrate progress and growth!鈥�

A parent who asked to remain anonymous assumed their child was being discriminated against due to disability, writing, 鈥淢y child came back as “ineligible” for G&T 鈥� he is entering second grade and got all 3s and 4s in his core subjects. He had one 2 on his report card, and it was NOT in a core subject. It was in academic and personal behaviors due to the time management and organization sections. He has ADHD and an IEP, and it seems to me that if they exclude children based on this section of the report card, it would be excluding them based on their disabilities.鈥�

Finally, yet another Jen revealed, 鈥淢y son got all 4s in what I believe are the ‘core’ grades at the school, but within the subcategories, got some lower numbers. We know another child who is at a different district school whose report card didn’t show subcategories, got all 4s and got an offer. I don’t understand how the DOE can say determination is based on report card grades but then not say how.鈥�

So not only were public school students assessed using different grades from independent, parochial and charter students, but children at different schools were evaluated differently based on whether their report cards utilized subcategory grades.

But the biggest inequity in this year鈥檚 gifted-and-talented process was that, unlike previous years, when each individual student was compared against the citywide applicant pool, this year, children were ranked only within their own schools.

Previously, kids who scored in the top 10% citywide were entered into the G&T lottery. This year, only the top 10% from each individual school were. 

This means that, with the addition of subcategories, a student whose report card had all 4s might not make the cut if they were only 鈥渓ow 4s鈥� in a high-performing school, while a student with all 3s in a lower-performing school would qualify. The schools.nyc.gov website has an entire report touting “.” How was the above process either of those things?

These advanced learners, who may also receive special education services, can languish academically, their skills overlooked. The same holds true for children, and those learning to speak English. 

Experts say most teachers have only limited training in gifted education and tend to focus on students鈥� limitations rather than their strengths, leaving twice exceptional learners particularly vulnerable. 

In some cases, these students鈥� disabilities can mask their aptitude. In others, their accelerated nature can hide their challenges. 

In both instances, they often go without the support they need and may come to feel unintelligent as their confidence wanes.  

ages 3 through 21 were served under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act in 2017-18, according to the National Center for Education Statistics. They represented but only 2.8 percent of the 3.3 million children enrolled in gifted programming that year, the last for which such data was compiled by the U.S. Department of Education. That figure jumped to , or 15 percent, in 2020-21. 

Experts say schools鈥� failure to help these students reach their potential amounts to a loss not only for the child themselves, but for the community and nation. 

鈥淚f they are not identified and supported properly, gifted students are often in classes below their abilities,鈥� said Megan Cannella, family services manager at the , a Nevada-based nonprofit dedicated to profoundly gifted students age 18 and under. 鈥淭he work can seem redundant, boring and slow. In these situations, students are typically not learning new information or growing their skills. Over time, this becomes discouraging, and they may underachieve 鈥� by rushing through work, doing the bare minimum or refusing to do work.鈥�

Roughly 8% of the 846 students identified as gifted in the McAllen Independent School District in South Texas are twice exceptional. They have either a 504 plan, which provides for support services and accommodations, or are enrolled in special education classes, a district official said. 

Broward County Public Schools in Florida reported a slightly higher rate at 8.4%. Of the 1,364 students in Denver Public Schools鈥� gifted or highly gifted program in grades K-5, 131 have special needs, bringing the percentage to 9.6.

Children with either 504s or Individualized Education Plans, special schemes to help disabled students succeed in school, made up 10% of the 6,666 students in Florida鈥檚 Hillsborough County Public Schools gifted elementary school program, officials said. Orange County Public Schools in that same state came in at 9%.

Baltimore City Public Schools has made a concerted effort to include under-represented children in this group: It came in at the highest level with 358 of its 3,114 elementary-aged gifted and advanced students having a learning disability 鈥� nearly 11.5%.

Gifted and talented offerings across the country have been under fresh scrutiny since former Mayor Bill de Blasio moved, in October 2021, to end the program at the elementary school level because it perpetuated decades of discrimination against Black and Hispanic children. Eric Adams, who struggled in school himself with dyslexia and replaced de Blasio in January, decided to preserve and , despite its  

Deborah Alexander, of Astoria, Queens, recalls the frustration she and her son, Augustus, endured when he was in the first grade.

鈥淗e wasn鈥檛 learning to write letters properly,鈥� she said. 鈥淗is hand strength was not there. We had him evaluated by the school and they told us, erroneously, his grades were too good to qualify for services.鈥�

Alexander, who has served on the Community Education Council for District 30 for a decade, is also a member of New York City鈥檚 or PLACE, which is currently investigating how twice exceptional children are being treated.

She asked, back when her son was young, if he could type on a computer rather than write by hand, but the request was denied. 

Augustus鈥檚 grades started to slip, but that all changed when he was allowed to type on a tablet in middle school. 

Augustus, diagnosed with 鈥渄isorder of written expression,鈥� a learning disability, and obsessive compulsive disorder, said the accommodation transformed his educational experience: The 15-year-old rising sophomore at the prestigious Bronx High School of Science said he no longer worries about his work being illegible. Finally, he could share all he knows, he said, adding that every child should be given the tools they need to succeed. 

鈥淚t鈥檚 really important that everyone can learn, not just for the larger benefit of society, but because it develops you,鈥� he said. 鈥淓ven just last year, if I had to write by hand, I don鈥檛 think I would be as prepared for next year or for college.鈥�

Brandon Wright, editorial director at the , a conservative education policy think tank, understands this population.

鈥溾�嬧�婭 had a bad stammer and was also gifted,鈥� he said. 鈥淢y school offered me a speech therapist, giving me the tools I needed to thrive in the classroom.鈥�

But he knows not all children have this opportunity, which is why he advocates universal screening in which all students鈥� test scores are examined for standouts. 

But test results should be only one element, said Wright, who just launched a bi-monthly newsletter, , to chart the progress of gifted education in America. Teachers should be better trained to spot these students and they should be admitted on a rolling basis with 鈥渃onstant on-ramps,鈥� giving children multiple opportunities to join such programs as their skills develop. 

Yet Nielsen Pereira, associate professor of Gifted, Creative and Talented Studies at Purdue University, who instructs educators, said many of his students, including those who have been in the classroom for years, 鈥渁re surprised these types of students even exist.鈥� 

Many college and university programs don鈥檛 mandate proficiency on the topic: An educator鈥檚 exposure might amount to a single lecture buried inside another, unrelated course. 

A lack of funding for these programs, which are not mandated at the federal level, helps explain why they are available in some locations and not others 鈥� and why their quality varies so widely, he said. 

鈥淲e focus so much on making sure everyone is meeting the minimum standards that we forgot about how to bring kids 鈥� to their highest potential,鈥� he said. 

And there are other characteristics among twice exceptional children that can make them hard to spot. Not all have high marks: Disillusionment with school coupled with the challenges of their disabilities can cause them to give up, further camouflaging their talents.听

Felicity Ross, who teaches mathematics to gifted children inside Baltimore City Public Schools, said it鈥檚 easy for teachers without proper training to correlate low test scores to low skills. 

鈥淚t can take years to diagnose kids with disabilities 鈥� and years to identify them as being gifted,鈥� she said. 鈥淭his is particularly tough for new teachers.鈥�

But, she said, there are tactics that can help: When it comes to evaluating those children who have trouble writing, for example, educators should consider other factors.

鈥淲e need to listen to them verbally,鈥� she said. 鈥淲hat they can tell us and explain might be at a different level than what they can write down or show. For math kids, they can鈥檛 explain it 鈥� but produce a correct answer.鈥�

The problem there, she said, is that current standards around mathematics require students to show their progress and explain the strategy. 

鈥淏ut that doesn鈥檛 align with their skills and abilities,鈥� she said. 

Megan Roddie, 25, graduated high school two years early, earned two master鈥檚 degrees and enjoys a thriving career in cybersecurity. Diagnosed with autism at age 12, she didn鈥檛 recognize her own abilities for several years and the teachers in her Houston-area schools didn鈥檛 know how to handle her. 

鈥淚 talked a lot 鈥� and out of turn,鈥� she said. 鈥淚 was ahead of the curriculum I was given 鈥� and when I got bored, I acted out. They decided I wasn鈥檛 paying attention and that was an issue.鈥�

But why pay attention when she already knew the answers, she reasoned.  

And, she said, her teachers didn鈥檛 always recognize her needs: When she scored stellar marks in mathematics in middle school, they moved her to the back of the classroom so the struggling kids could sit up front. 

鈥淚 felt like I was being punished, taken away from my favorite spot,鈥� she said. 鈥淓specially as an autistic kid, you don鈥檛 mess with my routine.鈥�

It takes time and communication for teachers to learn what their students need. And, experts say, teachers should remember children do not have to be advanced in all subjects to be considered gifted. 

鈥淪ome kids would benefit from advanced math but may not benefit at the moment from an advanced English class 鈥� though that could change in the future,鈥� the Fordham Institute鈥檚 Wright said. 鈥淲e don鈥檛 want to have exclusionary gifted services, but a spectrum of increased intensity that meets as many kids as possible where they are.鈥�

Homero Ch谩vez, the Early College Program director at Gadsden Elementary School District No. 32 in San Luis, Arizona, at the nation鈥檚 southern border, relies heavily on student test results to identify those who are gifted in mathematics. 

The highest scoring on standardized exams at each campus in the 5,000-student district are invited, starting in the fifth grade, to join a program that allows them to take for-credit college-level courses 鈥� and the ACT. 

Disabilities are not considered in the admissions process although students are accommodated as needed, Ch谩vez said. 

鈥淚f they wish to be in a high-level class and they excel, why not?鈥� he said. 鈥淭hey do have the right to be there.鈥�

The magnitude of this announcement is that it represents a shift away from models of gifted and talented programming that rely on labeling, sorting and segregating students, and toward designs that encourage inclusion and integration of all children in mixed-ability classrooms. It also represents a philosophical shift in the understanding of gifted education because of its recognition of all children’s innate potential for demonstrating strengths and high intellectual performance.

The Javits program reflects our position on the future of G&T education because it addresses equity through the excellence targeted in gifted education. Some school leaders and policymakers are already re-envisioning what gifted programs should look like, rather than tweaking admissions systems and maintaining separate classes that serve only a select few. For example, students in ; , Minnesota; ; , New York; and at in Brooklyn, New York, are being exposed to accelerated learning and enrichment opportunities based on the philosophy that all children have unique gifts and talents 鈥� and it is the school鈥檚 job to identify and cultivate them. 

One district that is working toward the goals of the Javits program is New York City. Last fall, then-Mayor Bill de Blasio announced he would eliminate separate G&T programs and replace them with 鈥�,鈥� . The plan was to stop testing 4-year-olds for coveted G&T slots, a practice that ended up with more than 70% of the 2,500 seats 鈥�, who make up less than a third of the city鈥檚 overall student population,” each year. The new plan was to offer all kindergartners access to accelerated learning starting in September 2022. Yet, because de Blasio announced this change three months before Mayor Eric Adams took office, the city still seems to be at a crossroads, even after extensive .

This is unfortunate, as a in New York City and beyond finds that the separate and segregated nature of most G&T programs sustains inequities inside schools . In 2013,  at Michigan State University compared how students of comparable academic abilities perform when they are admitted to a public school for gifted children versus when they remain in regular-track schools and classrooms. After a year and a half of G&T classes, there was essentially no difference in test results between students in G&T who had scored right above the admissions cutoff and children in regular classrooms who had scored just below. A 2019  of 2,000 elementary schools across three states by the National Center for Research on Gifted Education echoed those findings: Third graders in gifted programs made no significant learning gains in comparison with their peers in general education. 

The problem starts with , which lead to inequality and exclusionary behaviors by some parents who can access test prep and other means to secure scarce seats for their children. Students in G&T classes who are segregated from their peers miss out on the numerous benefits of , , including higher test scores in math and science and cultural competency skills for global literacy. In addition, sorting students into separate programs or classes unfairly labels them. As Linda Darling-Hammond wrote, 鈥�. All children are motivated to learn the next set of skills for which they are ready; few are motivated by labels that rank them against others or communicate stigma.鈥�

Discriminatory and subjective admissions criteria such as achievement tests, grades and teacher recommendations that districts typically use to identify students for G&T have been blamed for the segregation 鈥� and they are certainly part of the problem. Yet districts must change not only how they .听

We believe, based on our research and advocacy work with urban and suburban schools, that what is holding some districts back from offering G&T education to all is the assumption that parents with children in separate programs will oppose it. This , based on winners and losers, is morally, ethically and . It perpetuates a system of and racial entitlement. But there is an alternative to such an us-versus-them mentality: the solidarity dividend, also known as a 鈥渞ising tide lifts all boats鈥� mindset.

There is evidence that New York City families, students and educators will support phasing out separate G&T programs and replacing them with schoolwide enrichment models, such as STEM or International Baccalaureate. It was a that led the school to end G&T. A group of NYC students are plaintiffs in a lawsuit against the city that .” And District 13 Superintendent Kamar Samuels said this about his district’s replacement of separate G&T classes with schoolwide programs: 鈥淚t鈥檚 about all students in the school and all teachers in the school (emphasis added).鈥� Commenting on NYC鈥檚 shift to G&T education for all, education scholar , of the National Association of Gifted Children, said, 鈥淲e should absolutely be doing a lot less separating of these kids, unless there is literally no other way to provide a particular service.鈥�

Many more students lack access to G&T classes than have it. Why not use those numbers as the rationale to provide gifted education to all? What is now a private commodity that benefits mostly white and Asian students can become a public good for all children. It is time to set a new path forward and celebrate all students for their unique abilities and strengths, rather than labeling and sorting them. As the Javits gifted and talented program proposes, more districts should move toward the goal of gifted-for-all programs 鈥� and receive funding to do that important work.

Allison Roda is an assistant professor of education at Molloy College in Rockville Centre, New York. Yvette Jackson is an adjunct professor at Teachers College, Columbia University, and senior scholar at the National Urban Alliance for Effective Education. Halley Potter is a senior fellow at The Century Foundation.

In 2017, when our older son graduated from Stuy, and 2018, when our younger one started, the number of Black students there was under 40. Across all eight high schools that use the Specialized High School Admissions Test, only 3.6 percent of admission offers in 2021 went to Black students (though they make up 26 percent of the total public school system), despite the availability of a city-run .

African-American enrollment at Stuyvesant . This was three years after the admissions test was enshrined into state law as the sole criterion. 

So where have all the Black students gone?

As the , 鈥淒ecades ago, when crime and socioeconomic conditions were far graver than they are today, Black and Latino teenagers passed the examination in great numbers.鈥�

And while the contents of the test have been tweaked a few times since then, on each occasion the was to enable more Black and Latino students to qualify for admission. In addition, a was put in to help those who scored just a few points short of the qualifying cut-offs to attend summer prep courses and earn a second chance at admission. So what happened? Why didn鈥檛 anything work?

recalls that: 

Back in the early to mid-1960s, I was part of a wave of young Black and Latino shock troops coming out of poverty, public housing and tenements whose purpose was to obliterate any and all educational obstacles. We excelled at school and test-taking. We kicked down educational barriers wherever they existed, hoping that there would be a stream of Black and Latino students who would follow our example and slip through the cracks our assault on the system had created. We took the specialized high school entrance exam and passed. We gained admission to Stuyvesant, Bronx Science and Brooklyn Tech, and for years, the number of Black and Latino students attending the elite schools increased. When people talked about integration in those times, WE were integration. This group of 鈥渦ppity鈥� young Black/Latino young men and women was able to successfully compete anywhere at any time with anyone. Then something happened. Our young people seemed not so uppity and often not as ready to compete with others. Numbers that had risen, whether test scores or admissions to prestigious schools, leveled off and then began to decline. What happened? 

What seems to have happened is multiple policies that were supposed to encourage the longed-for integration of New York City public schools. As the Times elaborates: To understand this decline involves a trek back through decades of policy choices, as city officials, pushed by an anti-tracking movement, rolled back accelerated and honors programs and tried to reform gifted programs, particularly in nonwhite districts.

In an attempt to shrink the achievement gap, New York, along with many other American cities, moved to get rid of 鈥� the practice of sorting students by ability into homogeneous classrooms. Though on the pros and cons of heterogeneous ability grouping, in New York City, the view prevailed that getting rid of accelerated and honors programs in kindergarten through eighth grade would lead to higher 鈥� or, at least, equal 鈥� achievement for all in high school.

What happened in actuality was the opposite: In wealthy districts, when programs for high achievers were cut, parents moved out of the city, transferred their children to private schools or hired . In poorer, often also nonwhite, districts, high-achieving students were left with no such options. No more honors programs meant a curriculum well below what some students were capable of. It meant fewer complex texts to analyze and in middle school. Mastery of both is vital to success on the high school admissions test 鈥� but students were no longer being taught what they needed to know to pass it.

Plus, where, previously, a majority non-white school with a terrific academic program might have attracted some wealthier and whiter students (a phenomenon we are currently seeing with some ), the lower-performing these schools got, the fewer affluent families of any ethnicity would even consider attending them. This led to even more segregation, both racial and economic 鈥� not less, as had been predicted.

The ultimate consequence to losing these programs was espoused by city public advocate and current gubernatorial candidate Jumaane Williams, himself a Brooklyn Tech grad. In 2020, he joined City Council members Robert Cornegy, Ben Kallos and Justin Brannan to that would require every public middle school to provide free specialized high school admissions test prep. As Williams wrote in , 鈥淭he most clear failure has been establishing an accessible pipeline. In the past, gifted-and-talented programs in middle schools have been a reliable pathway.鈥�

A key bit of irony is that, prior to , when elementary schools were allowed to select students for admission to neighborhood G&T programs using their own criteria, those programs were more racially and socio-economically diverse than they became after the process was standardized under Mayor Michael Bloomberg. Once applicants were all required to take the same test and earn the same qualifying cut-off score, G&T . And in neighborhoods where very few children qualified under the new standardized scoring system, G&T programs were shuttered.

Under Mayor Bill De Blasio, even more G&T programs , this time not due to lack of applicants or qualifiers, but in the interest of 鈥� another name for the detracking movement. In the , middle schools that for their advanced programs based on grades and test scores dropped the practice altogether. In both cases, that spelled the end of placing some students on an accelerated academic track.

In 2021, de Blasio announced that all and would be eliminated, once schools were no longer allowed to look at grades and test scores in order to place students into advanced classes.

It was the original push to end tracking that brought us to the current state of only a handful of minority students earning entry into the specialized high schools. As of now, we are still on what will happen to K-8 G&T schools and whether they will also no longer be allowed to offer for advanced learners. Considering the results of the last 40-plus years, should we really keep doubling down on an approach that has been demonstrated to hurt more than it helps?

Alina Adams is a New York Times best-selling romance and mystery writer, the author of Getting Into NYC Kindergarten and Getting Into NYC High School, a blogger at and mother of three. She believes you can’t have true school choice until all parents know all their school choices 鈥� and how to get them. Visit her website, .

Experts say teachers have not been adequately trained to spot these students鈥� gifts and that schools鈥� failure to recognize and grow their talent could turn them off to school entirely.  

Educators鈥� increased focus on English language learners comes as school districts around the nation reassess their elementary gifted and talented offerings after New York City鈥檚 program was by the outgoing mayor for its failure to include Black and Hispanic students. The program won a , though concerns about equity will likely remain.

Immigrant advocates in New York and elsewhere say English language learners鈥� exclusion marks a major loss not only for those who have been shut out, but for their families, communities and the nation at large.

While advanced programs at the elementary level are dubious 鈥� most major long-term academic gains 鈥� a student鈥檚 selection signals to schools, parents and the child that they have special gifts, boosting their confidence and exposing them to advanced materials.

Carly Spina, who taught English language learners inside Glenview School District 34 near Chicago for 15 years, said that in some cases, a child鈥檚 participation in gifted programming in their elementary years is a prerequisite for their enrollment in advanced courses in higher grades.

鈥淚t鈥檚 all about access,鈥� said Spina, who now works with educators who serve these children statewide. 鈥淥ur students deserve to be there.鈥�

And it鈥檚 more than an ethical issue: It鈥檚 a legal obligation.  

Kristina Moon, senior attorney with the Education Law Center, said English language learners have the right to equal opportunity in all school programs.

鈥淭hey cannot be excluded 鈥� just because they are not proficient in the English language,鈥� she said, citing the federal .   

Those concerned about these students鈥� overlooked abilities are re-evaluating their methods. 

Jonathan Plucker, president of the , said schools around the country are beginning to abandon costly non-verbal gifted assessments for English language learners because they yield the same results as traditional verbal tests.

鈥淲e cannot figure out why that is the case,鈥� Plucker said. 鈥淭hese districts are finding it鈥檚 expensive and they aren鈥檛 getting different data. For the life of us, we never expected that.鈥�

鈥榃e don鈥檛 have any talented students鈥�

English language learners represented of students nationwide in 2018 according to the National Center for Education Statistics. Yet they accounted for just 2.4 percent of the nation鈥檚 3.3 million gifted children that same year, the last for which such data is available, according to the U.S. Department of Education鈥檚 Office for Civil Rights. 

While the data alone do not prove discriminatory conduct, the civil rights office said in a statement, members of the public who believe these students are being unfairly excluded are invited to on their behalf.

A survey by 蜜桃影视 of school districts across the country reflects the national disparity. While some managed to include a proportionate 鈥� or nearly proportionate 鈥� number of non-English speaking students in gifted programming, most included only a fraction of these children.

English language learners accounted for 18 percent of the student body in the Broward County Public Schools in Florida, but make up only 1.5 percent 鈥� just 39 of 2,607 children 鈥� in its gifted elementary program.

Other districts, including those in Prince George鈥檚 County, Maryland, and Florida鈥檚 Palm Beach, Brevard and Miami-Dade counties, report similar statistics.

Educators who work with gifted students are taking note and trying to make change. 

Their efforts coincide with a massive uptick in crossing the nation鈥檚 southern border now that immigration and pandemic-related restrictions have eased.

These students face numerous hurdles upon arrival: Educators often underestimate their intelligence and ability, working under the false assumption that they are somehow deficient or in need of remediation. 

What schools fail to realize, experts say, is that many of these children have already mastered multiple languages in their home countries, a reflection of their acumen.

鈥淚t is not rare for me to talk to a principal who says, 鈥楢ll of this is really important,鈥欌�� Plucker said. 鈥溾�楢nd I say, 鈥榃hat can we do to help you with your school?鈥� And they say, 鈥極h, we only have low-income Hispanic kids here. We don’t have any talented students.’鈥�

Part of the reason for this, experts say, is schools鈥� overreliance on test scores as a means to assess student鈥檚 ability. 

English language learners often score low on state and other exams, but for some, it鈥檚 language, not a lack of brainpower, that holds them back. Experts say a child who earns low marks might still be gifted, but their skills need to be identified in other ways.

鈥淲e have all of this talent just sitting there,鈥� Plucker said. 鈥淎nd the child isn鈥檛 benefiting from their own skills. That is a massive societal failure. We simply have to do better.鈥� 

Amal Altareb, 20, knows what it鈥檚 like to struggle with a new language. She arrived in the United States from Yemen at age 11 unable to speak English. Determined to learn 鈥� she was a gifted student back home 鈥� she spent hours each night translating her assignments.  

“I pulled so many all-nighters,鈥� said Altareb, who attended school in Memphis, Tennessee. “I was not giving myself any mercy.鈥�

While some educators failed to recognize her abilities 鈥� her math teacher openly laughed at her homework because she so badly misinterpreted the instructions, she said 鈥� her English as a Second Language instructor, who spoke her native Arabic, knew she was gifted. 

“I have so much gratitude for him,鈥� she said. “I would ask him questions from the beginning of the class until the end.”

Altareb scored high enough on her end-of-year math and science assessments to be placed in gifted classes the following year. She was even permitted to study Russian even though she had not yet fully mastered English, a reflection, she said, of her principal鈥檚 faith in her abilities.

鈥淧eople believed in me after I proved myself,鈥� she said.

The teen enrolled in college-level Advanced Placement courses in high school and went on to become valedictorian. 

She is now a political science major at Yale University. 

New, non-verbal tests use animation

There are only 137 English language learners in Prince George鈥檚 County Maryland鈥檚 gifted and talented program in grades 2-12, comprising less than 1 percent of the 11,560 participating students. Non-English speaking children make up 19.7 percent of the overall student population.

Theresa Jackson, the district鈥檚 supervisor of talented and gifted programs, said an additional 1,469 participants are former English language learners who have tested out of the program. Still, she said, their linguistic ability is typically not on-par with native English speakers. 

Jackson said, too, that her school system is always striving to increase identification of historically underrepresented populations, including those students who receive free and reduced-priced meals, an indicator of poverty, in addition to Hispanic students and those who receive special education services. 

鈥淚 am not sure I will ever be fully happy, but we are inclusive of all sub-groups,鈥� she said.

In Palm Beach County, Florida, just 1.9 percent or 84 children of 4,519 gifted and talented students were English language learners. Yet these children comprise more than 23 percent of the district鈥檚 elementary school population. The figures include the district鈥檚

Walter G. Secada, vice dean of the School of Education and Human Development at the University of Miami, said many educators believe a child鈥檚 English must improve before they are identified as gifted.

But that鈥檚 untrue, he said, adding the narrative only serves as an excuse for teachers not to look for talent in this group.

鈥淚t locates the problem within the child and not in our delivery system,鈥� he said.

Experts say schools鈥� role as gatekeepers to advanced learning can be problematic: Many campuses rely on teacher and parent referrals to identify gifted children, both of which lead to the exclusion of those just learning English.

Kathy Escamilla, interim executive director of the BUENO Center for Multicultural Education at the University of Colorado, Boulder, said newcomer families face unique challenges in communicating with their local schools and are often reluctant to push back, not wanting to seem disrespectful.

鈥淣on-English speaking parents aren鈥檛 going to go to school and say, 鈥業 think my kid is gifted,鈥欌�� she said. 鈥淭hey are much too humble and rely on the school to do those kinds of things.鈥�

Spina, of Illinois, said some parents are required to write a letter explaining their position and win the support of other teachers, a difficult task for families who do not speak English.

The longtime teacher, has, in some cases, informed parents of their legal rights, helped them write rebuttals, accompanied them to meetings with school administrators and worked to make sure translation services were available.

鈥淲e have to embrace our space as change agents,鈥� Spina said. 鈥淲e have to advocate. If we are not fighting for them, we are not walking our walk here.鈥�

English language learners鈥� exclusion from gifted programming is a long-standing but not unsolvable problem. Escamilla said schools can use high quality non-verbal assessments 鈥�  some have just been released 鈥� and better train staff to assess non-English speaking students through observation.

They can also use tests written in the child鈥檚 native language, she said.

Jack Naglieri, a psychologist and research professor at the University of Virginia, created one of the most widely used tests for assessing the ability of non-English speaking children.

He鈥檚 recently developed a new exam for this purpose, the first of its kind to use animation.

“There is no doubt in my mind we will find more children who do not speak English doing well on these tests,鈥� he said.听

Quick to understand cultural norms

Marcy Voss of Kerrville, Texas, has spent more than 35 years working with or on behalf of gifted and bilingual children either as a teacher or an administrator. Like Plucker, she and Escamilla are aware of the shortcomings of non-verbal tests.

Voss said educators should look at a portfolio of work 鈥� not a single test score 鈥� in order to identify advanced English language learners. 

Voss said, too, these students should not be evaluated based on what they already know: Some have missed years of school in their home countries and simply didn鈥檛 have the opportunity to learn. 

She and many other immigrant advocates believe these children should be evaluated based on how well they comprehend new material 鈥� an approach some administrators have been slow to embrace.

鈥淭here are gifted students in this population,鈥� she said. 鈥淚鈥檝e seen them and they deserve to have their educational needs met.鈥�

Whenever Voss is tasked with identifying a gifted child, she tries to understand the way their mind works, how quickly they catch on to new concepts and their ability to solve problems, she said.

With non-English speakers, she considers a number of additional factors, including how fast they learn the language.

Gifted English language learners might also adapt more easily to their new environment as compared to other newcomers 鈥� they might be quick to understand the cultural norms and nuances of their newly adopted country 鈥� act as ambassadors for other students and their own parents, all of which reflects their ability to make connections quickly, she said.

鈥淭hey understand the hidden rules of order without having them explained,鈥� said Voss, who facilitates the Emerging Leaders Program for the.

But even after they gain admission to advanced programming, English language learners can face nearly insurmountable obstacles: Many teachers of gifted and talented students don鈥檛 feel they need to make language accommodations for non-English speaking participants, Spina said.

Spina is sensitive to teachers鈥� time and workload, but will challenge those who shirk this responsibility, telling them, 鈥淵ou don鈥檛 get to opt out.鈥�

New York City schools are reeling from COVID-19 and have yet to fully assess the damage wrought by three academic years of disrupted instruction. Adams will take charge amid concern for missed learning and disenrollment, in addition to issues that pre-date the pandemic, including and .

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for 蜜桃影视 Newsletter

With mayoral control, Adams has wide discretion over the Department of Education, though how deeply he will seek to leave his imprint on the city鈥檚 roughly 1,600 schools over the next four years is unclear. Though mayoral control is technically set to expire in 2022, Adams is to request an extension from the state.

Multiple Adams to tap his close advisor David Banks, founder of the Eagle Academy for Young Men, as the next schools chancellor. But the Brooklyn native may also maintain current Chancellor Meisha Porter, a longtime NYC public school teacher and administrator who is a friend and former employee of Banks.

The mayor-elect is a retired police captain known for his within the department, and will be only the second Black New Yorker elected to run City Hall. His commitment to education is closely tied to his experiences with the criminal justice system.

鈥淚f we don鈥檛 educate, we will incarcerate,鈥� he said in a recent mayoral debate.

Adams also shared that, as a young person, he struggled with a learning disability that went undiagnosed until college.听

鈥淚 overcame a learning disability and went to college and was able to obtain my degrees. And now I will be the mayor in charge of the entire Department of Education,鈥� he joked in his Tuesday night.

Adams plans to expand screening for dyslexia in city schools, and has articulated his intent to reconceptualize the education system as 鈥渂irth to career鈥� rather than K-12, including an emphasis on career and technical education.

But even as he prepares to take office, few specifics of the incoming mayor鈥檚 education agenda are known.听

Here are three key issues that will demand his attention:

1 Gifted & talented education

In October, Mayor Bill de Blasio made headlines for announcing that he planned to overhaul the city鈥檚 gifted and talented education program, long criticized for its stark failure to include Black, Hispanic and other students.听

The program, which uses a single test administered to 4-year olds to determine admission, serves about 2,500 of the city鈥檚 roughly 65,000 kindergarten students each year. De Blasio announced that he sought to scrap the test and implement 鈥�鈥� for all youngsters through second grade, with screening for subject-specific advanced coursework not coming until the start of third grade.

Adams, however, said that he plans to keep and expand the city鈥檚 gifted program. In a debate, he noted that he intended to make the tests opt-out, rather than opt-in, so that more families have access.

鈥淭his way, we would catch all the children who are capable of being gifted and talented,鈥� said Adams.

But the mayor-elect has also signaled that he harbors misgivings over the program鈥檚 admission process.

鈥淚 don鈥檛 believe a 4-year old taking an exam should determine the rest of their school experience,鈥� he said during an Oct. 20 debate.

For older students, Adams entrance tests to the city鈥檚 selective high schools, which have infamously let in of Black students. Teen activists calling for integration of the city鈥檚 schools have also demanded their overhaul and have a federal civil rights complaint pending against the use of all NYC school screening practices.

2 Student vaccine mandates

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention endorsed coronavirus vaccines for children ages 5 to 11 on Tuesday, meaning virtually all K-12 students are now eligible for shots.听

Naturally, questions swirl over whether the nation鈥檚 largest school system will require children to be inoculated. De Blasio enforced the city鈥檚 vaccine mandate for school staff, which took effect in early October and of teachers to receive their shots, but he has taken a softer approach on student vaccinations. The outgoing mayor has supported schools to set up clinics, but has not gone as far as to require shots. On Wednesday, he announced that every school serving students aged 5 through 11 will host vaccination sites starting Monday.

Adams, however, is mulling student vaccine mandates, and has said he is 鈥渙pen to having the remote options of education鈥� for unvaccinated learners.

K-12 vaccine mandates for students remain relatively rare, with a handful of California school systems, including Los Angeles and Oakland, as well as Hoboken, New Jersey among the only districts with such policies.

3 Disenrollment

Enrollment in New York City schools dropped 1.9 percent this year, with 938,000 students now in traditional public schools, down from 955,000 last year and slightly over 1 million in the 2019-20 school year.

Though the relative drop is less than other major cities like Los Angeles and Chicago, the continued bleeding of students provides further evidence of the profound disruption that the pandemic has had on NYC public education. The Department of Education has yet to release figures on the share of students missing so much school that they may be academically at risk, and some officials fear that wide swaths of students, especially in under-resourced communities, may be disengaged from school.

Re-engaging disconnected students will be a chief challenge of the mayor-elect鈥檚 effort to bounce back from pandemic schooling.

鈥嬧�婣s district schools lost students, enrollment in independently run city charter schools rose 3.2 percent this year, to 143,000, following national trends. Adams has said that he intends to keep the current cap on charter schools, while also adding that successful models should be duplicated and failing ones shut down. De Blasio was known for his battles with the city鈥檚 charter sector.

鈥淲e look forward to working closely with [Mayor-elect Eric Adams] and his administration to create a partnership that will benefit all NYC public school students, including the 143,000 attending charter schools,鈥� said James Merriman, CEO of the New York City Charter School Center in a statement.

The program鈥檚 very existence at the national level has grown increasingly politically polarized in recent years, with many progressives pushing for its dismantling and conservatives arguing for its preservation: In the nation鈥檚 largest school system, which serves nearly 1 million students, politicians, not educators, are fighting over its future.听

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for 蜜桃影视 Newsletter

What will happen to New York City’s program is uncertain: outgoing Mayor Bill de Blasio of 4-year-olds and instead offering accelerated learning to all of the city’s 65,000 kindergarteners next fall compared to 2,500 such children today. Eric Adams, de Blasio’s all-but-certain successor, has said he wants to keep the gifted and talented program, but create his own version whose eligibility requirements and delivery methods he hasn’t specified.

To better understand what other school systems are doing to identify and serve gifted children, 蜜桃影视 asked more than 20 large and diverse districts across the nation about their screening processes, delivery methods and racial breakdown of participants. Ten replied, including Los Angeles Unified School District, Fairfax County Public Schools in Virginia, Florida鈥檚 Orange County Public Schools and Cypress-Fairbanks Independent School District in Texas.听听

We also queried experts who have spent years assessing gifted programs’ efficacy. And while there are strong differences of opinion as to the programs鈥� merit, many in the field agree that the nation鈥檚 approach is scattershot and delivery is too often ineffective.听

If gifted and talented education in younger grades is to survive, it will have to change.

鈥淭here is a lot of rethinking of these more traditional models and some recognition that they don鈥檛 work so well for the kids that are in them,鈥� said Jason A. Grissom, professor of public policy and education at Vanderbilt University.

Grissom found, after nearly 13,000 kindergarten children across the country for six years starting in 2011, that students showed only modest gains in reading and math in the years of their participation in gifted and talented programs. They showed no change in the frequency with which they report to work hard, pay attention and listen in class, among other factors.

And the results were worse for Black and low-income students: They did not appear to benefit academically, on average, possibly because their schools’ offerings were less robust than those of their wealthier peers.

Yet these programs have many supporters. Dina Brulles, who serves on the board of directors for the National Association for Gifted Children, said her organization was “devastated” to learn New York City might no longer have a gifted and talented program, a move that who believe it’s their child’s only path to a quality education.

鈥淲e know these kids need something different,鈥� Brulles said. 鈥淭hese students cannot be challenged in a regular classroom with someone who does not have the training or resources.鈥�

The problem is solvable, she said. But schools must let go of outdated approaches.

鈥淎 lot of districts have the same programs for 10, 20 or even 30 years and look for a kid to fit in it,鈥� said Brulles, who is also the director of gifted education in the Paradise Valley Unified School District in Arizona. 鈥淚 take the opposite approach. I look for the potential, group these students together and find out what they need.鈥�

Sandra Kaplan, professor of clinical education at the University of Southern California, bristles at the notion of dismantling gifted education in younger grades, saying some children are simply more capable than others and should have their interests recognized. An expert in the field who has worked as a consultant for school districts and state departments of education around the country, she said teachers should be on the look-out for more-abled students as soon as they enroll.

鈥淚 want to start at preschool,鈥� Kaplan said, adding that classrooms should be rich with materials meant to spark kids鈥� interest, much like a museum. 鈥淚t is a teacher鈥檚 responsibility to provide an environment where kids can demonstrate what they know.鈥�

Much of the model she suggests relies on teachers鈥� observation of students. She balked at the idea that such a method seems inexact and might exclude some children.听

鈥淭here is a subjective element in all evaluation,鈥� she said.听

Nearly all of the school districts that responded to our survey have opted for universal screening, testing all students in younger grades for possibly entry to their gifted and talented programs in effort to sidestep the selection bias of teachers, which has of Black, Latino and Native students and those from low-income families.听

But even this has not guaranteed equal access.

Fairfax County Public Schools conducts universal screening in first and second grade, but there is another pathway 鈥� it consists of parent referrals, appeals, requests for re-testing and procurement of outside exams 鈥� 鈥渇or those who know about it,鈥� according to a .听

That second, alternative route, 鈥渋nserts a form of assessment bias, similar to traditional uses of teacher or parent nominations,鈥� meaning that only some parents are aware of and take advantage of this work-around.

Los Angeles Unified was under scrutiny from the Office for Civil Rights for years because of the lack of Black and Latino students in its gifted programs: the case was closed in November 2019 after the country鈥檚 second-biggest district enacted several measures to include them.

Some 3.3 million children participated in gifted and talented education nation-wide in the 2017-18 school year according to The Office for Civil Rights in the U.S. Department of Education. Records from that time, which reflect the most recent data, show 58.4 percent were white, 18.3 percent were Hispanic or Latino, 9.9 percent were Asian and 8.2 percent were Black.听

Students with disabilities made up 2.8 percent of the total and English language learners comprised 2.4 percent.听

Grissom found, in a , that children in the top 20 percent of the socio-economic status distribution were seven times more likely to receive gifted services than those in the bottom 20 percent.听

The inequity remained even for those at the same achievement level: A child at the top income bracket was two to three times more likely to participate in gifted programing than a child at the bottom, even when their academic performance was the same.

And the tools used to determine students鈥� eligibility for gifted services 鈥� plus their expected performance on those measures 鈥� vary from one district to the next. The 10 districts that responded to our survey listed five different assessment exams among myriad other qualifications for students.

Third-, fourth- and fifth-graders at Clark County School District in Las Vegas, Nevada, must score at or above the 98th percentile on two commonly used entrance exams, the Naglieri Nonverbal Ability Test Third Edition or Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test Second Edition. They can also qualify if they earn at least 15 points on a combination of other factors, including testing.

Conversely, Baltimore City Schools changed its gifted and talented admissions requirements eight years ago in order to include a far greater swath of children: Any student who scores in the 73rd percentile on that same Naglieri test administered to kindergarteners is automatically enrolled and also must be provided with an Individualized Learning Plan 鈥� a sort of gifted version of the Individualized Education Program required for special education students, which might include advanced coursework or guidelines for an independent study program.

Prior to the switch, only 1,675 of the district鈥檚 students 鈥� it does not have data specific to elementary schools 鈥� or 1.97 percent qualified for gifted services in math and English language arts. By the end of the 2020-21 school year, 5,238 students, or 7.4 percent, had been identified, all while overall district enrollment shrank during the prior eight years.

Dennis Jutras, coordinator of gifted and advanced learning in the school system, said he鈥檚 proud of his district for holding onto the program. Baltimore schools serve nearly 78,000 children. More than 75 percent are Black, 14 percent are Hispanic and 58 percent hail from families with low income.听听

鈥�We have codified universal screening, mandated individualized learning plans 鈥� and stated unequivocally that these students exist in all our schools and must be deliberately supported,鈥� he said. 鈥淕ifted learners are atypical learners. To force them to adapt to a one-size-fits-all model of learning is inequitable 鈥� and doubly so when we’re talking about students of color and/or under-resourced communities. We would never treat other atypical learners in this fashion.鈥�

Other school systems have taken an even broader approach: Some of third- through 11th-grade students in Charlottesville, Virginia have been identified as gifted after a policy change that resulted in relaxed screening standards.

Paradise Valley Unified School District in Arizona uses universal screening to assess young children at all of its Title 1 schools. But it identifies gifted students by comparing them only to those children within their building rather than to the district at large, a tactic that could pit them against far more affluent kids.

Paradise Valley offers 14 different means to serve advanced learners, dividing participants into numerous groups based on their needs. Its 鈥渦niquely gifted鈥� program serves children who need special education services and also have high intellectual abilities: Many have autism.听

It has also made strides in including another historically overlooked group: English language learners. While the talents of students with special needs might be revealed during IQ and other tests of their ability, teachers often underestimate the intellectual abilities of children who do not yet speak English. Nearly a third of Paradise Valley鈥檚 students are Hispanic and 6 percent are English language learners.听

鈥淚f we don鈥檛 take those measures, we are going to miss them,鈥� Brulles said. 鈥淭hose are the kids who worry me the most, the kids who have high potential but are being underserved.鈥�

In addition to differences in screening and grouping students, there is also tremendous variation in how services are delivered, even within the same district. Children in Orange County Public Schools in Florida receive gifted services in one of four ways: Some study core subjects alongside only their gifted peers while others attend gifted class for a specific subject area.听

Many districts are turning away from the traditional model of pulling children out of the classroom for enrichment and instead call for them to learn alongside their peers with their teachers providing more advanced materials, lessons and guidance for the selected few.

While this technique, called differentiated instruction, might be preferred, it鈥檚 often poorly executed by teachers already struggling to meet the needs of an intellectually diverse student body. A push in this direction might mean a slow death for this controversial program.

Differentiated instruction is what Mayor de Blasio, with just months left in office, proposed in place of funneling a small sliver of kindergarteners into advanced programs. But to train thousands of city’s teachers to serve gifted learners in every classroom is an effort that would require .

鈥淲e don鈥檛 do differentiated learning properly,鈥� Grissom said. 鈥淭eachers are able to do it to some degree, but not the degree needed to meet kids three grade levels ahead of the standard.鈥�

And the qualifications for those teaching these children varies from one state to another.

Gifted students in Texas鈥檚 Cypress Fairbanks Independent School District receive differentiated instruction from teachers who鈥檝e completed a minimum of 30 hours of required training in gifted education.

Paradise Valley requires a minimum of two college courses on the topic or 90 hours of professional development in the form of workshops and conferences, but encourages most of its teachers to take five college classes or complete 180 hours of training.

Beyond each district’s own staff requirements and various program machinations are children like 8-year-old Nonso Anaedozie of Baltimore who loves math so much she practices multiplication on the weekend just for fun.听

The third-grader spends most of her school day learning alongside other advanced students: Their coursework is, on average, six months to a year ahead of their typical peers, one of her teachers said.听

Nonso, whose father hails from Nigeria, is also pulled out of the classroom for advanced work in mathematics and English language arts.

Teachers describe the little girl as highly verbal, creative and confident 鈥� she won鈥檛 just write a song but sing it in front of the class, they say.

Nonso hopes to one day become a dancer and artist 鈥� she was particularly happy with her sculpture of donuts and coffee in addition to her rendering of Van Gogh鈥檚 The Starry Night 鈥� but is also considering a career in 鈥減eacemaking,鈥� a skill she鈥檚 been honing since she was a young child.

鈥淚n kindergarten, I helped kids who were sad,鈥� Nonso said. 鈥淎nd now, I help people become friends, which solves their problems.鈥�

The child was identified as advanced just before she started kindergarten based on her performance on a gifted education admissions test. She said the advanced coursework makes her appreciate all of her special gifts and that she enjoys the challenge of her tougher curriculum.

鈥淚t helps me think about my talents and makes me think about being myself 鈥� different from others 鈥� which I really like,鈥� she said.

Even advocates for the current system will admit its myriad flaws. The word “gifted” implies that even before kindergarten, some students have inborn genius and others don鈥檛. This itself seems dubious, but not as dubious as the idea that a single test given at age 4 could identify these children 鈥� or that . In the 2018-19 school year, .

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for 蜜桃影视 Newsletter

These numbers reflect the fact that, as in any system, families with resources and privilege can take advantage. Parents who could afford tutoring, who had extra time to spend with their 4-year-olds and who could hunt down prep materials could give their kids a better shot. This, much more than innate ability, is the 鈥済ift鈥� these children have.

. For many working or low-income parents 鈥斕齣ncluding Asian families, who have the 鈥� G&T is a听. Lots of families with extremely limited resources put them toward G&T prep, investing 鈥� quite literally 鈥� in their children.

Many more families in poor and working-class neighborhoods have been unable, for various reasons, to access G&T programs. But they, too, want better for their children 鈥� witness the influx of students into charter schools. Fortunately, there is a way to provide accelerated education to those who want it and can鈥檛 afford to pay for academic enrichment outside of the school day: tutoring.

What has been mislabeled as 鈥済ifted鈥� is really, in almost all cases, 鈥渢ime on task.鈥� Charter schools learned long ago that the best way to improve student outcomes is to expand the school day, lengthen the school year and ensure that as little time as possible is wasted. While tutoring has mostly been discussed as a means of , it can also be leveraged to provide the same end.

Between the from the elimination of the G&T test and a small fraction of the

city schools are receiving, every child in grades K-2 attending a Title I school could be provided with two hours weekly of optional, free, enrichment tutoring. Current education undergraduate and graduate students, substitute teachers and others could provide the service, creating a pipeline of educators to feed into the system. Most children already have school-issued computers from the pandemic; devices could be distributed to those who don鈥檛. With a large enough pool of tutors, every family would be able to select the hours that work best, so parents could be involved as well.

This would be a far better use of resources than the alternative de Blasio : training already-overburdened teachers in accelerated education. Differentiating instruction 鈥� teaching students who are at different levels at the same time 鈥斕齣s an incredibly difficult skill that takes years to master. The idea that it can be successfully implemented for 4,000 teachers next year strains credulity.

Many working families see G&T as a ladder out of a system in crisis. Parents know that many schools are not working for their children, and they demand better. They deserve to have the accelerated learning they want for their children. It can be focused, efficient and effective. Let鈥檚 hope that, come Jan. 1, New York City has a mayor ready to roll up his sleeves and do this work on behalf of kids.

Arthur Samuels is co-founder and co-executive director of in Brooklyn.

In August 2019, New York City鈥檚 School Diversity Advisory Group called for elimination of the city鈥檚 gifted and talented programs in grades 1 to 5, to be . That vote got a mention in a May 2021 Journal of Educational Evaluation and Public Policy paper titled, “.”

As with , it gives both proponents and opponents of gifted education .

Authors Christopher Redding of the University of Florida and Jason A. Grissom of Vanderbilt University write:

Rigorous studies of gifted programs in single-school districts demonstrate that participation can (emphasis theirs) have positive effects on student achievement.

They also write:

Two separate studies of 148 students in gifted programs have (shown) improved nonacademic self-concept but not academic self-concept (emphasis mine).

Two issues raised in this paper are of particular significance to New York City. The first is the effect of G&T programs on low-income and minority students, and the second is the education delivery model.

The advisory group鈥檚 primary reason for advocating to abolish G&T is to increase school diversity. Currently, while the is 40.6 percent Hispanic, 25.5 percent Black, 16.2 percent Asian and 15.1 percent white, accepted into G&T are white and Asian.

Redding and Grissom report that, nationwide:

Gifted programs have faced longstanding criticisms of elitism and that they represent hoarding of opportunities for already advantaged students, criticisms that often are grounded in patterns of underrepresentation in access to gifted programs for marginalized students. 鈥� For children whose families already have access to high levels of cultural, social and economic capital, gifted programs are often characterized as an 鈥渁ccumulation of advantage.鈥� In contrast, for high-ability students without that same access 鈥� particularly low-income students and students of color 鈥� gifted programs may help compensate for what may otherwise be regular classroom setting with lower expectations of weak academic rigor鈥�. Enrollment in a self-contained accelerated class exposed Black and Hispanic students to higher teacher expectations than they would experience in a traditional classroom setting. (No evidence was found that white students scored higher when enrolled in gifted classes; benefits were concentrated among Black and Hispanic students.)

Based on the above, it would seem that rather than getting rid of G&T programs for all students, it would make better sense to broadly expand them, so that more Black and Hispanic students could benefit.

The advisory group claims that is exactly what it is trying to do. As of this writing, the majority of NYC G&T programs are 鈥渆nriched,鈥� meaning that individual classroom teachers have the freedom to enhance standard public school curriculum as they fit, be it with hands-on projects, field trips, additional readings, etc. By implementing 鈥淓nrichment for All,鈥� they would be making a G&T experience available to every student. Right?

Not exactly.

The study authors’ language is very clear. They speak of a 鈥渟elf-contained accelerated class鈥� as benefiting Black and Hispanic students. The majority of NYC G&T programs are 鈥渆nriched.鈥� Only five, citywide programs are , in that students learn the standard public school curriculum a year in advance.

We are told the reason it is so difficult to gauge the actual value of a G&T program is that:

The relatively small estimates of the typical gifted program may reflect the fact that the 鈥渢reatment鈥� many students receive is not sufficiently intensive鈥�. As national evidence shows that a majority of elementary school gifted programs include four hours or less gifted education services a week, the educational dose of gifted programs may be too slight to yield positive effects.

This suggests that 鈥渆nrichment鈥� wouldn鈥檛 be enough, even if it were offered to all students. (It should be. All students deserve all sorts of enrichments to their education.) But it still wouldn鈥檛 serve the needs of the high-ability population, especially among poor and minority students, because 鈥済ifted researchers contend that acceleration is an effective and cost-effective way to supplement the learning needs of exceptionally talented students.鈥� Acceleration, not enrichment.

The authors speculate:

It could be that resource constraints in the schools Black and Low-SES [Socio-Economic Status] students attend result in limited frequency or duration of gifted services鈥�. We hope that this finding (that enrollment in a self-contained accelerated class benefits Black and Hispanic students) might lead practitioners in gifted education to take a close look at their offering to assess whether they are adequate for serving the needs of high-ability students from historically marginalized student populations鈥�. Proponents of gifted education may well conclude that what our results suggest is that investment in gifted services needs to be increased, not decreased, so that gifted students are afforded higher-quality, more challenging opportunities by teachers trained in gifted education over more of their school day.

I am not a proponent of gifted education. I am a proponent of every child receiving the education they need when they need it.

As I wrote at the start: Proponents and opponents of gifted education can find something to support their views in the study. (For instance, the Hechinger Report “Gifted programs provide little to no academic boost.”) We all see what we want to see. We all cherry-pick what we want to cherry-pick.

But what I saw (and cherry-picked) was in direct opposition to everything NYC is proposing.

They say we should get rid of G&T in the name of diversity and offer all students the same enrichment opportunities.

I say we should expand G&T in the name of diversity and give those students who could benefit the most from it, especially low-income and minority kids, access to an accelerated curriculum.

If, as the study suggests,

Resource constraints in the schools Black and Low-SES students attend result in limited frequency or duration of gifted services while enrollment in a self-contained accelerated class exposed Black and Hispanic students to higher teacher expectations than they would experience in a traditional classroom setting, (and) benefits were concentrated among Black and Hispanic students,听

Wouldn鈥檛 it be racist not to?

Alina Adams is a New York Times best-selling romance and mystery writer, the author of Getting Into NYC Kindergarten and Getting Into NYC High School, a blogger at and mother of three. She believes you can’t have true school choice until all parents know all their school choices 鈥� and how to get them. Visit her website, .

After his own Panel for Education Policy voted down renewing the contract that had been used to test students for New York City public school gifted and talented programs, Mayor Bill de Blasio swore that parents of incoming kindergartners would still be able to for the G&T lottery.

Teacher and parent recommendations replace the standardized test. Students attending public pre-K would be evaluated by their teachers. Students in private pre-K or not in any program would be evaluated by city Department of Education early childhood education experts.

At the time, I questioned the in having teachers who might have different standards use their different judgments about whether a child was 鈥済ifted,” and whether having some children evaluated by total strangers could produce a .

Parents began receiving email to schedule their child’s virtual assessment in May, and the actual interviews appeared consistent, except for one detail. Parents wrote me to report:

AS: It was about a 20-minute conversation with a lot of questions about my child鈥檚 strengths, preferences, curiosity, emotional expression and personality. She said I would likely find out in a few weeks regarding the lottery, but she did not specify exactly if she would be making a recommendation.听

SZ: The lady seemed nice and genuinely interested. She asked me a series of questions 鈥� describe how your child reacts to new experiences, how does he learn, how does he play, etc. She ended by saying she would write a recommendation.听

NN: The DOE person started the interview with an explanation that they only fill out the form and have no bearing on the lottery.听

The deadline for submitting a recommendation form was May 11. The week before, my email box began filling up:

BP: I filled out a G&T application for my daughter who attends a DOE pre-K. I have not received an appointment to meet with anyone, nor did her teacher receive any information to fill out about her.听

AB: My son鈥檚 pre-K is still saying they haven鈥檛 received any nomination form. I called the DOE, they say they sent it. I feel so lost and confused.

CJC: Our daughter has not been evaluated nor her teachers contacted when we called last week. DOE advised that it was the school we applied to (not the pre-K) that was organizing the evaluation.听

MTW: What I was informed by the DOE 鈥� and likely the reason why teachers are reporting that they have not received any forms 鈥� is that there are actually none being sent out. Apparently, teachers need to go onto their portal to access the list of applicants to be able to fill out the form. However, it feels like there was probably not sufficient explanation to teachers that they had to do that 鈥� I asked what portal and was told 鈥� that her teacher is welcome to call the hotline if she has questions.

CC: My son鈥檚 DOE pre-K teacher informed me that she never received an evaluation. Was the DOE supposed to contact the teachers directly? She seems to have no idea how to complete the form.

LR: My teacher has yet to receive the nomination form. I called the DOE today and they advised they indeed saw my application go through successfully and suggested I reach out to the school, though they could not tell me who the email was sent to requesting the nomination form. My teacher said nothing was received 鈥� later, I got a call from our assistant principal and she 鈥� was able to forward it to our teacher.听

Matters grew even more confusing when, as the application deadline loomed, some parents continued getting calls about interviews while others were asked for the names of their child鈥檚 school so the teachers could fill out a detailed form.

QZ: My daughter is currently enrolled in a private school. On April 29, DOE sent me an email with a survey link asking for my daughter鈥檚 program information and her teacher鈥檚 email address. 鈥� The website says, 鈥淲e will email your child鈥檚 teacher or program in the next 24 hours.鈥� Twelve days later, my daughter鈥檚 teacher hasn鈥檛 received anything yet. 鈥� I called 鈥� after a 45-minute wait, the person who picked up the phone said the only thing he could do was to escalate the issue 鈥� I also emailed 鈥� as of now, I鈥檓 still waiting, there is no link sent to my daughter鈥檚 pre-K teacher, and there is no interview arranged.

JG: I was never contacted. I emailed and called the DOE twice this past month and they said they鈥檇 notify someone. NOTHING. So much for 鈥渆quity.鈥濃��. Now that I emailed them again they are forwarding me surveys to fill out with the private preschool information for my child鈥檚 teachers to perform an evaluation. The best part is that they are 鈥渞eminding me鈥� per the body of the email to use the survey which they have absolutely never before sent to me. Good times!听

JS: I have received zero communication from the DOE on next steps for completing my daughter鈥檚 G&T application. I have attempted to contact DOE every day this week and I鈥檓 either put on hold for long stretches of time, only to reach people who can鈥檛 help me except to send me to me to the same email addresses that I keep following up with but haven鈥檛 heard anything back from. In the meantime, my private pre-K teacher notified me she received nomination forms for my daughter鈥檚 classmates interested in G&T, but nothing for her.听

PL: My wife called last week regarding our daughter because we received an email that she was enrolled in a program and we had to complete a survey. She has not been enrolled since March 2020 and never for pre-K. Upon calling, they said we have her listed as being in pre-K or the school has her listed, so the form was sent to the school. 鈥� Well, my wife is the director of that school and goes on to inform them that she has not received ANY forms for G&T for any students including our daughter. After a few more days of back and forth 鈥� she still has no forms and we are told our daughter was placed on a waitlist for interviews. Today we received another email asking us to fill our survey (already have) and anyone who hasn鈥檛 will be scheduled for an interview next week.听

ML: [T]he principal of my son鈥檚 school 鈥� said the teachers had filled out questionnaires about each student and that the school had submitted them to the DOE, and that we would find out the results in July. I asked if the teacher/school had made recommendations to the lottery and he basically said at this point it鈥檚 in the hands of the DOE, they didn鈥檛 have any further visibility. I was surprised since I had thought we鈥檇 be informed whether our kids were even going to be in the lottery. … Makes it a little frustrating to read some about these inconsistencies 鈥� the principal (who I like a lot) was visibly frustrated with the whole process, so sounds like that feeling is shared all around.

AN: My son鈥檚 teacher emailed us today to say they received the assessment forms for G&T lottery and already submitted them (not sure how much time she spent on them since her email was sent in the middle of the day when the kids were still in school). She said they asked about the child鈥檚 curiosity, play and approaches to learning and relationships and interactions. She did not indicate if she had specifically 鈥渞ecommended鈥� a child to be eligible for the lottery or not or if the DOE would make that determination based on how the form was filled out.

JP: I was called by a DOE instructional coordinator Friday to schedule the interview. I was surprised because our child is enrolled in DOE pre-K but in a remote learning cohort. I thought her teacher would do the nomination. When I asked why it was not her pre-K teacher who nominated, I was told that they were trying to get a whole picture of the child from both teacher and parents. We were told that our child would be nominated for the G&T lottery at the end of the interview.听

PW: Spent 40 min on hold and finally got through to the DOE. The person I spoke to said that G&T nomination forms need to be accessed through the Principal鈥檚 Hub Portal. I made sure that they knew that schools hadn鈥檛 been informed of this and there was a lot of confusion. I then reached out to my son鈥檚 school (he鈥檚 in a DOE pre-K inside of a private school) and they said that since they鈥檙e not a public school they have no access to the Principal鈥檚 Hub. I freaked out for a minute and prepared myself for another long wait on hold with the DOE, when my school鈥檚 principal wrote back and said she just got an email that the deadline was extended to Friday and she got a link to the nomination form.听

As that extended deadline grew closer, the interviews, questionnaires and teacher evaluations suddenly seemed irrelevant:

LB: For a private nursery school perspective (as a director) DOE has emailed us a form to ask if we nominate or don鈥檛 nominate. That is the only question. Seems strange that DOE remote kids get more input on their forms.

RG: Our daughter鈥檚 teacher/school director said she received an online prompt that simply asked for an up-or-down question on whether they recommended the child for G&T (accompanied by an explanation of the kind of factors that they should take into account).听

So 鈥�

Some children in public pre-K were evaluated based on a detailed questionnaire. Some children in public pre-K were evaluated based on a single yes-or-no question. Some children in public pre-K were evaluated based on their parents鈥� opinions. Some were evaluated based on a combination of the above factors.

Some children in private pre-K were evaluated based on a detailed questionnaire. Some children in private pre-K were evaluated based on a single yes-or-no question. Some children in private pre-K were evaluated based on their parents鈥� opinions. Some were evaluated based on a combination of the above factors.

No one, at any point, knew exactly what was going on.

This is the equity, transparency and inclusion in admissions that de Blasio for his final year in office?

The teachers were fighting three enemies. The Monday fatigue that made the third graders yawn through their screens. The disturbances of the Wi-Fi that muffled conversations. Time itself.

They battled the uncontrollable through smiles: Teacher Annie Nguyen wore a hooded sweatshirt with white furry panda ears 鈥� it was pajama day, and the students took to the chat box to express their excitement.

They鈥檙e in third grade, a critical year for multiplication and reading, but because of the pandemic, they鈥檙e in Zoom school at Highline鈥檚 McMicken Heights Elementary. The setup gives them significantly less face time with their teachers, and because the clock was ticking, Nguyen and her colleagues had to keep the lesson moving, no matter what.

They鈥檙e practicing a learning strategy known as 鈥渁cceleration鈥�: Keep students progressing to more advanced lessons. Catch them up as needed. Don鈥檛 dwell on what was missed.

While COVID-19-related 鈥�learning loss鈥� is a new phenomenon, making up lost ground is not. There鈥檚 plenty of research on what happens when education is disrupted by natural disasters, like Hurricane Katrina, or planned breaks in learning, like summer.

In Highline Public Schools, leaders consulted that research when trying to mitigate the havoc that the pandemic could wreak on students鈥� learning, and landed on acceleration. In many cases, districts turn to acceleration to leapfrog students ahead. Highline, a diverse district where 71% of students are living in poverty, is trying to speed up students across the board.

And they鈥檙e finding it can work for everyone.

Acceleration entails focusing on key building blocks, or standards. Looking closely at what students know and don鈥檛 through a variety of check-ins, which allows teachers to change how students are grouped. Every unit starts with a pretest, so teachers don鈥檛 waste time. And they use 鈥渁synchronous鈥� or independent time to catch students up.

It鈥檚 an alternative lens. 鈥淲e鈥檙e really trying to stay in a mindset where we鈥檙e not talking about learning loss,鈥� said Susanne Jerde, Highline鈥檚 chief academic officer. 鈥淚t鈥檚 important to understand that some students have learning loss, but we also want to build on the fact that our students have other opportunities to grow.鈥�

What tells Jerde it鈥檚 working: On a districtwide diagnostic test, the , the percentage of students below grade level overall on math didn鈥檛 grow significantly from one and two years ago. In third grade, the results were steady, though there were slight dips in some other grades.

It鈥檚 hard to interpret these results when students test at home, Jerde said, surrounded by distractions or caregivers. But the i-Ready scores, coupled with anecdotes, make her think students are learning. And she also took their i-Ready participation rates 鈥� 80% in reading and 86% in math in grades one through eight 鈥� as a sign of success.

鈥淭he alternative is to remediate and say they鈥檙e a year behind,鈥� Jerde said.

Who gets a boost?

The concept of accelerating students ties into vitriolic debates over who gets 鈥渁dvanced鈥� instruction and how. The research behind Highline鈥檚 approach shows many students aren鈥檛 placed at the appropriate grade level.

Called 鈥淭he Opportunity Myth,鈥� a 2018 paper from a New York-based consulting group TNTP followed about 4,000 students and found that most spent about six months of class time a year on assignments below their grade level, or that were too easy. Kids learn better if you move them forward, and explicitly involve them in their growth.

Mindset matters. Teachers can approach instruction from looking at what students miss instead of how they鈥檙e growing 鈥� which, said Nguyen, becomes 鈥渁 self-fulfilling prophecy. If I only believe that a student has so much potential, then I鈥檓 right. I鈥檒l only teach a kid to that potential.鈥�

So she tries to be 鈥渙bnoxiously optimistic.鈥�

Nguyen brought that optimism to that Monday math class. 鈥淒oes it matter, the order of the numbers?鈥� Nguyen said. 鈥淎 fancy way to say that is the associative property. Say that with me.鈥�

They unmuted, repeating the term. 鈥淭hink about what happens when two people share really well,鈥� she said, alluding to the task they鈥檇 need to accomplish in their breakout groups 鈥� and how they鈥檇 catch up later if they didn鈥檛.

One boy started speaking but was interrupted by static. Quickly, Nguyen moved the lesson along: 鈥淲ho else wants to go?鈥�

鈥淵ou can break apart the biggest number so it will be easier,鈥� offered a student called 鈥淒inkneh BMX Champ鈥� on screen.

She explained that when they started this unit on Friday, students were at different levels. Today, they鈥檇 work through problems on grids together to hone their skills.

Click. Nguyen beamed the class up into breakout rooms, each one with a student coach. She and co-teacher Jaymie Torres Ibarra bounced between the rooms, watching, prompting engagement where there was none.

By the end of class, Nguyen had figured out who needed help, and asked them to meet her in another Zoom room later that day.

How Highline accelerated

For decades, schools faced an annual problem: the summer learning . When kids are on summer break, they lose ground. But students from families with more resources fall back less. And a 2007 from Johns Hopkins University scholars suggests that much of the so-called achievement gap is more connected to this time than school itself.

Related research coupled with COVID-19 had Alexandria Haas, principal of Highline鈥檚 McMicken Heights Elementary, thinking about 鈥渁 different way of teaching and learning.鈥�

Two years ago, after 鈥淭he Opportunity Myth鈥� was released, Jerde said, Highline began paying close attention to TNTP鈥檚 work on acceleration.

Meanwhile, in San Francisco last spring, Jeffrey Tsang, a partner with TNTP, tried to problem-solve learning loss before it happened. 鈥淥ur hypothesis was that the tendency would be to remediate: Gaps would widen, kids will suffer,鈥� he said.

Tsang hearkened back to 鈥淭he Opportunity Myth鈥� study. His conclusion: 鈥淲e must get kids back on grade level as quickly as possible.鈥�

TNTP updated its for pandemic-era acceleration. One key concept 鈥� a term that Tsang and Highline educators say often 鈥� is 鈥渏ust-in-time teaching.鈥� That means giving a student just the right amount of help to move forward in a subject where they鈥檝e missed a prerequisite skill, like the after-class help Nguyen and Torres Ibarra provided.

This summer, Tsang helped prepare Highline for online acceleration. He focused on four issues: What standards should be emphasized less to teach the important ones more efficiently? Which prerequisite skills were missed? How do you measure and diagnose those gaps? And how do you then modify the sequence of material based on what kids know and need to learn?

For Nguyen, summer was a time to test these ideas. She orchestrated a weeklong pilot by rounding up the children of some friends. She wanted to see whether the ideas the district had discussed made sense when put into practice with actual children involved, so she could bring some lessons to her colleagues.

She and Kimberly Campi, an English language learner facilitator and instructional math coach, developed an elaborate system of Google Docs to track their students鈥� learning, sort students according to the help they needed each day, and create rubrics that show what students are expected to absorb.

Nguyen tries to keep the groups 鈥渁s fluid as possible,鈥� because her goal is 鈥渢o push them to the next day, to the next group.鈥� It helps when students can see their growth in concrete ways.

Whittling down the lessons is hard, Haas said. It means being OK with pausing some work in progress. 鈥淚t is pandemic schooling,鈥� she said.

These ideas resonated with Robin Totten, the principal of Highline鈥檚 Gregory Heights Elementary. At her previous job at the University of Connecticut鈥檚 Center for Urban School Improvement, she turned to acceleration frequently. 鈥淭he strategies that we often reserved for 鈥榞ifted and talented kids鈥� are great strategies that work for every student,鈥� she said.

She sees acceleration 鈥渁s a great anti-racist practice鈥� because 鈥渨e鈥檙e taking a strategy that would typically have been reserved for the kids in self-contained gifted programs.鈥� Those programs are often segregated.

Tough beginnings

Nguyen and Torres Ibarra鈥檚 third grade Zoom classroom wasn鈥檛 always the buzzing, laughing environment it is now. In the beginning, students kept their cameras off. Break rooms were silent. The two teachers forged individual connections to change the atmosphere.

Then, they turned classroom management into the lesson itself. Even while ruthlessly prioritizing, they made time to teach the students how to learn. They started by making 鈥渢alk charts鈥� that showed students what they could say to their peers. It felt forced at first.

They gave students social prompts to practice these skills. They slowly introduced more academics, starting with straightforward lessons.

It wasn鈥檛 just those two teachers who had to break the ice. 鈥淭here wasn鈥檛 a class that taught pandemic teaching 101,鈥� Totten said.

Districts trying out acceleration should consider some potential missteps. Tsang said executing it successfully depends on having teachers who are willing and able to do it. He also warned districts against trying to accelerate learning without prioritizing what they need to teach more.

And, some say, because of the variation between environments, technology and teachers, it鈥檚 hard to make any significant conclusions about what works. In Highline, it鈥檚 been hard to sustain, especially during a pandemic, Haas said. 鈥淚t鈥檚 very easy to be lost in the minutia and the things that aren鈥檛 working.鈥�

Students teaching students

The answer to a ticking clock, Nguyen said, is precision. With technology troubles, there were moments when she struggled to pick apart student success because so many variables obscured the picture. That murkiness forced the teachers to further polish their tests: To find useful information, they needed to articulate what they were looking for. Still, they want to know more.

On a recent Friday, the McMicken Heights third graders pushed through writing class. Their goal: To write stories with beginnings, middles, endings, problems and solutions. They had drafted fractured fairy tales 鈥� swapping conventional stories for different characters and plots 鈥� in Google Docs.

The beginning felt like whack-a-mole as Torres Ibarra and her colleagues checked in on student work in one big Zoom room.

Before sending students into breakout rooms, she made their task clear. She read prompts for providing compliments and suggestions, speaking in a singsong voice, all smiles, as she showed examples of good feedback.

The minute his breakout room opened, Dinkneh, a serious kid in a yellow sweatshirt, a blue watch and glasses, began reading his version, The Three Little Knights, to another student, a boy named Bryant.

鈥淟ittle knight! Little knight! Let me in,鈥� he said loudly, his eyes wide as he told Bryant that 鈥渢he king warned them to look out for the big bad DRAGON!!!鈥� He read so fast he had to gasp and catch his breath.

Nguyen popped in, just as Dinkneh鈥檚 audio dropped. 鈥淎re you still there, sweetie?鈥�

Bryant was supposed to be coaching, but it was nearly impossible to hear him: He spoke quietly, his screen was off, there was background noise.

Nguyen prompted him to give more specific feedback, then prompted Dinkneh to respond graciously.

Haas visited class that day, and was impressed to see a student with disabilities newly introduced to the general setting 鈥渞ocking it,鈥� she said.

鈥淚 am anxious to see what kids are learning,鈥� Haas said. 鈥淚 have heard anecdotally that my teachers are starting to see that impact.鈥�

Highline Public Schools planned to reopen to some younger children in March.

鈥淚鈥檓 bracing myself,鈥� Haas said. 鈥淚 am anticipating that there鈥檒l be some gaps.鈥�

It will be a moment of truth.

This article, which , is being co-published here via the SoJo Exchange from , a nonprofit organization dedicated to rigorous reporting about responses to social problems.

On a recent summer Tuesday at noon, a straggler checks into a Zoom meeting, where 107 teachers, administrators and school counselors are listening to Paul Forbes deliver a lecture on implicit bias, the human tendency to judge others based on stereotypes unwittingly internalized.

Forbes is the New York City Department of Education’s director of educational equity, anti-bias and diversity. He’s run these mandatory workshops for two years, but the past four months have been different, with schools shuttered by a global pandemic 鈥� one that still threatens September鈥檚 reopening 鈥� and a national reckoning taking place over the long-standing inequities faced by Black Americans.

“Now, more than ever, this is incredibly important,” Forbes told 蜜桃影视. “People have been quarantined, folks have been sheltering in, and people are seeing things in the news and on the streets. They’re starting to think about the introspective work needed to understand their historical context. This is an opportune time to reflect.”

His is a hopeful take on how hundreds,听or potentially thousands, of staff will process a required professional development exercise that was contentious even before COVID-19 struck. Then again, Forbes’s work is fueled by optimism, predicated as it is on the idea that the nation’s largest school district can use empathy to move a mostly white teaching corps toward a more mindful approach, as they teach 1.1 million students who largely don’t look like they do.

At the forefront of Forbes’s mind is how this gap in life experience plays out in the classroom. New York remains one of the nation’s most segregated school systems. Across the city, Black students are at disproportionately higher rates and in gifted and talented classes less frequently than their white and Asian peers. In 2018, a white teacher drew outrage after on a student while teaching a lesson about slavery.

As Forbes explains in his workshop, the policies and procedures that have led to those problems can’t change until the administrators who put them in place 鈥斕齛nd the teachers who uphold them 鈥斕齮ake some time to examine the subtle preferences that they carry into daily interactions.

He likens this process to darkening a window so that it turns into a mirror. Workshop proponents say the endeavor is long overdue and might just stand a better chance at success now that, following weeks of protesting, a majority of Americans across racial groups say they the Black Lives Matter movement.

But tackling the underlying assumptions of 130,000 employees has never been an easy feat, and it certainly isn’t now, with 5,551 school safety officers, who were under the supervision of the New York Police Department, beginning their transition to the DOE. That move, in part a response to last month鈥檚 police brutality protests, will include continuing the officers鈥� training in de-escalation, implicit bias and restorative justice work, a DOE spokesman .

In person, the implicit bias workshop was a five-hour affair held in a rented space. Now, it consists of three hour-long, self-paced sessions, followed by an hour-and-a-half-long videoconference led by Forbes or one of his five colleagues.

Like the in-person version, the virtual session introduces a number of social psychology terms, including affinity bias (the tendency to side with people who share things in common with us), confirmation bias (the habit of preferring information that validates already-held beliefs) and conformity bias (the desire to align with a group’s opinion).

Before the pandemic, attendees were clustered to discuss by Nigerian author Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie on the danger of a single story, draft poems about the people and places that shaped them, and chat about the origins of their names.

These interactive elements are no longer built into the workshop; the team tried using breakout rooms initially but ran into too many technical problems to keep them up.

Instead, the pandemic iteration is a lecture punctuated by three chances to engage using the Zoom chat box. Attendees are invited to vote on their musical preferences, guess student graduation rates by demographic, and select the most widely held American bias 鈥斕齱hich, it turns out, is ageism, a point Forbes drives home by playing of 鈥淔orever Young鈥� by Alphaville. The workshop addresses not only age and race but also gender, disability and sexual orientation. Viewers don’t have to participate in the chat to pass the class.

Researchers are still trying to understand how to decouple people from their prejudice in a way that sticks. Some data show that implicit bias workshops on that front.

“The relative scarcity of field experiments testing effectiveness leaves ambiguity about whether diversity training improves attitudes and behaviors toward women and racial minorities,” the authors of one paper in 2019. “One-off diversity trainings that are commonplace in organizations are not panaceas for remedying bias in the workplace.”

Rachel Godsil is a co-founder of the , an organization that gained recognition for anti-bias workshops coordinated with Starbucks in May 2018. Around that time, officials at the NYC Department of Education approached Godsil’s staff and asked them to help shape their own training.

While she acknowledges that research shows that success from the workshops is minimal, Godsil argues that they’re still useful.

“We’re not suggesting that the five-hour training will make people unbiased,” she says. “It’s really hard to reduce biases. The goal is to have teachers understand the vulnerability it takes to engage with students differently.”

She hopes that the steps outlined in the session 鈥斕齭pending more time with people from different backgrounds outside of work, imagining oneself into different perspectives and slowing down 鈥斕齧ight change how participants interact with students in the fall.

As Forbes put it on the Zoom call, “You’re not going to end a session and be cured or healed or saved or sanctified. But you’ll be more aware.”

The Brooklyn-born sports fan is in his 23th year with the DOE, where most recently he was working with young Black and Latino men to boost their graduation rates.

During quarantine, Forbes spends his days leading the remote workshops and his nights reading the feedback he receives from staff. He misses the in-person sessions, where he could see them nod and shake their heads and call out from the audience.

“This work is about human connection,” he says. “A piece of that has been the face-to-face.”

In the current format, he can’t tell what’s happening on the receiving end for most participants during the lecture. Unlike some of his colleagues, Forbes turns his camera on, but attendees don’t have to.

“You could cook while you’re doing it. You could be on your computer shopping,” he says. “I can’t tell if you’re not paying attention.”

When the pandemic shuttered schools in March, it cut the in-person workshops short and shattered the possibility that the DOE might make the June 2020 deadline to train all employees that had been publicized in emails to school leaders a year earlier. By mid-May, the department was running the live sessions over Zoom, three times a day, four days a week.

The DOE has trained about 55,000 school-facing staff 鈥� less than half of all employees. Of those, just under 9,000 have done the workshop remotely in the past few months. Department officials say they’re working with superintendents on an updated timeline for completion, with the aim of wrapping up by June 30, 2021.

So far, the department has spent $6.3 million on the workshops, leaving $16.7 million of the total set aside by schools Chancellor Richard Carranza in 2018 for one of the cornerstones of his school improvement agenda. Forbes acknowledges that’s money his team could lose, given the city’s fiscal crisis.

“COVID-19 disrupted a lot,” he says. “I hope we’re fully funded to do what we need to do. I’m also pragmatic and know that cuts are going to occur, and that everyone’s going to feel it. If I find we only have two people, I’ll do what I can.”

Despite controversy over the workshops 鈥斕齭ome educators have said they’re too ““; others have at the mere suggestion that they harbor biases 鈥斕齮eachers who spoke with 蜜桃影视 reported that, overall, they’ve found the sessions useful.

Nicole Brennan, a science teacher at Queens Explorers Elementary School in Ozone Park, said her initial frustration over having to take the workshop evaporated quickly as she sat through a session in February.

She was moved by the scope of biases addressed, she says, and was struck in particular by the part that tackled gender.

“I never really thought before about the pressure boys are under, especially when it comes to athletics. That opened my eyes a bit,” she says, adding that the experience has influenced how she interacts with her 20-month-old son. “I’ve been thinking about how to be careful about the things I say to him.”

Another science teacher, Mike Loeb, who teaches seventh-graders in the Bronx, also found the experience informative.

“It was as effective as a one-off professional development workshop can be,” he says. “I believe being an anti-racist teacher is a requirement these days.”

Loeb says he’s seen some educators push back against the idea of re-evaluating their race-based inclinations during his work as a school union representative.

“It gets thorny very quickly,” he says. “There are folks who feel like, ‘I have biases, I need more [training].’ There are others who say, ‘This is a whimsical, fluffy, liberal agenda.'”

A few teachers interviewed by 蜜桃影视 hadn’t taken the workshop, and some were surprised to learn about the new deadline. Several hadn’t heard that it had moved online at all 鈥� including officials with the United Federation of Teachers. Others wondered how effective an online version could be. Most said the work is a step in the right direction but that the department could do more to support educators in their pursuit of mindful teaching.

Forbes says the workshops were never meant to be a silver bullet; rather, they were meant to fit into a broader push by the department to understand disparities among students.

He cites the “equity teams” organized by 29 districts around the city as an example. Each has selected two incubator schools, which have been collecting data on the demographic composition of school suspensions and gifted and talented classes.

Prior to the pandemic, the plan had been to add 17 more districts into the mix. According to Forbes, budget cuts could threaten that.

“We’ve had a couple of starts and stops,” he says. “We’ll see what happens now.”

It’s almost 2 o’clock. Forbes has somehow addressed death and discrimination, COVID-19 and in the span of 90 minutes, endearing himself to at least some of his vast audience in the process 鈥斕齛lthough given the format, what most of them are thinking is anyone’s guess. He invites attendees to unmute themselves, and a cascade of voices fall forward, blipping in and out, thanking the team and signing off.

A few people stay behind to chat with Forbes in the 20-minute window he has before his next meeting.

“I’d turn on my camera, but I’m still in my pajamas,” one says sheepishly, adding that the name-related part of the session really resonated with her, given that her own comes from adopted Sicilian and Arabic roots.

“Very nice,” Forbes smiles. “By the way, I’m in my pajamas, too.”

In an attempt to increase integration in , this panel has a bold but misguided idea: eliminate all gifted and screened schools and replace them with magnet schools and enrichment programs open to all students. This will only deepen inequity at a time when equitable access to gifted education must be drastically expanded.

The equity issue we don鈥檛 want to address

Gifted education is a tricky issue for most education equity advocates, and I admit to . I have no problem calling out the that is woven into the fabric of gifted and talented education in this country. Gifted education scholars such as and have called out these issues for decades. But eliminating gifted education because the results are not equitable is not the answer.

New York City鈥檚 most recent But only . We are legally obligated to provide ELL and special education services, but even if we weren鈥檛, I doubt we would ever propose ending ELL and SPED programming just because the results need to be dramatically improved. Why is it so easy to scrap gifted programs?

Maybe we just don鈥檛 鈥済et鈥� gifted education. Gifted students are a special needs group, yet we persist in this false idea that 鈥渢hey will be just fine.鈥� In 1991, I was a first-grade student at P.S. 91 in Brooklyn, New York. I was getting into trouble constantly. My teacher would give us classwork; I would finish it in two minutes, mess around with my classmates, get in trouble, get assigned more busy work, finish it in two minutes, and this cycle just continued. When the paraprofessional told my mother I needed to get tested for gifted and talented, my mother did not know what 鈥済ifted and talented鈥� meant. No schools in my district offered gifted and talented programs.

When I enrolled in at P.S. 208, my new gifted program changed everything for me. All of a sudden, the same behaviors I used to get in trouble for were required. Now, I was supposed to question my teacher. Now, I was supposed to get out of my seat and interact with my peers. The interesting part about this experience is that there were only 24 students in my gifted class, compared with more than 30 in the average P.S. 208 classroom. On top of that, my gifted class served two grade levels at once, meaning that this game-changing experience was available to only 12 students per grade level in a school that I and many of my classmates were bused to. This sparked my understanding that genius is distributed equally, but opportunity is not.

The story of my gifted and talented experience is not just about access but also outcomes. Out of the 24 students in my class, three did not finish high school and only a slim majority earned a college degree. I also struggled mightily in my first two years as one of only a few black students attending the Bronx High School of Science (before knowing that there would be even ). This is not unique to my story. , researched extensively by Jonathan Plucker and Scott Peters, highlights the fact that for the 3.4 million high-ability, low-income students in the United States, 23 percent do not take the SAT or ACT exam, less than half took an Advanced Placement or International Baccalaureate course, and almost one-fourth never even apply to college. It is time to reject the myth that gifted learners will be 鈥渏ust fine.鈥�

Gifted learners exist in every single school in every single community. We often see them in our classes, whether we identify them or not. Even in schools where a vast majority of students are 鈥渓ow-performing,鈥� we see some students jump two to three grade levels in a single year. We see ELL students who have an uncanny ability to grasp body language rapidly become emerging bilinguals and seamlessly code-switch across language and cultures. What are these students doing in our general education classes? Unless teachers are specially trained in meeting the needs of gifted learners and prioritize those needs, it is a crapshoot.

Sometimes they get lots of time to catch up on their favorite books because they finish the work so quickly. Other times, they learn the content so quickly they end up helping their peers with the work. On the other hand, if they are anything like I was, they are acting the complete fool out of boredom. But as a basic premise to ensuring that all children receive a free and appropriate public education, all students deserve to be challenged every single day.

It is not just unfair to ask gifted learners to serve as tutors and get 鈥渇ree time鈥� to do whatever they wish after they complete assignments that come so easy to them. It is also a large part of why we as a nation consistently leave genius on the table. Underachievement in our brightest learners is a massive challenge, and considering the tremendous challenges our young people need to tackle, not just to compete听in the global workforce but to ensure we even have a planet to work on, we cannot afford to keep leaving genius on the table.

A better plan for addressing the gifted gap

Instead of shutting down gifted education in New York City, I would recommend a large-scale expansion of gifted and talented services through a four-step process of universal gifted assessments using local norms; adding real substance to gifted and talented programs; training all secondary teachers to utilize gifted education strategies; and implementing talent development programs for Title I schools starting in prekindergarten. And if you are interested in figuring out how your school system can improve access and program quality for gifted learners of all backgrounds, these recommendations will likely work for you as well.

Universal Gifted Assessments Using Local Norms听

We have seen school districts such as in Colorado make significant gains in closing gifted gaps with a shift to universal screening practices and local norms. Universal screening means that every single student receives the district鈥檚 gifted and talented assessments (including nonverbal assessments known to identify giftedness in ELL students) instead of relying on parent or teacher referrals that are ripe for biases. And local norms recognize that the brightest students at every school are truly the brightest students at every school and need to have that talent fostered. Setting a standard that allows, for instance, for the top 5 percent of students at every school to be identified in gifted programs does not water down the program. Instead, it accounts for the reality that giftedness presents differently in different populations of students, leading too often to underrepresentation in schools serving low-income communities and overrepresentation in more affluent ones. Considering the current practice, in which , expanding access seems like a much better strategy than asking gifted children to rely on pure luck.

Gifted Programs Cannot Be Gifted in Name Only

Access is the most popular but not the only issue in gifted education. Too often, even when students are accepted into a gifted program, these programs are gifted in name only. Fortunately, there are many ways schools can . I was in a self-contained gifted class in elementary school and for my core academic courses in middle school. But gifted programs across the country find ways to meet the needs of gifted learners through pull-out programs, in which gifted students are pulled out once or more a week for enrichment and/or acceleration. Schools can also explore clustering, in which a critical mass of gifted learners assemble in the same class, allowing teachers to differentiate more easily.

Any program design must also recognize that gifted children are gifted all day, every day. To that end, ensuring that general education teachers are also trained in differentiation and other strategies to meet their needs should be a part of any school鈥檚 gifted education plan. In a district serving 1.1 million learners, gifted programs should not be one-size-fits-all. But they must be more than a fancy title that checks off a box.

Equipping All Secondary Teachers With Gifted and Talented Strategies听

Across the country, most gifted and talented middle and high school students do not receive formal gifted and talented programming. Instead, schools typically offer middle school students accelerated coursework or pre-Advanced Placement classes and offer high school students Advanced Placement, Honors and the International Baccalaureate program. These offerings often fall short, however, because gifted learners are not necessarily high achievers. They can be, however, if all secondary teachers are equipped with the tools and strategies to unlock their full potential. Almost all secondary educators teach at least some gifted learners and learners who are not gifted. So, as a bonus, the gifted education strategies they will learn will also bolster student achievement for all students. By not settling for offering advanced and accelerated coursework alone, schools can better meet the needs of gifted secondary students while raising the overall bar for achievement.

Developing Talent Starting in Preschool

New York City is already forging an equitable path by making access to early childhood education possible through . With this program in place, there is a tremendous opportunity to explore talent development models to encourage and foster the gifts in our youngest learners. Programs that educate parents on gifted education and help them understand how to best support the cognitive development of their children are crucial resources for our children鈥檚 first and most important educators. Pre-K programs can also help young children realize their gifts early by training early childhood educators on creating flexible workspaces and a least-restrictive environment for students to reach their full potential.

Unequal is inherently unequal

My high school English teacher at Bronx Science would frown upon my decision to introduce a brand-new point in my closing paragraph, but I am still a rule breaker, so here goes: I do not believe that integration as a goal in and of itself is worthy of Chancellor Richard Carranza and Mayor de Blasio鈥檚 School Diversity Advisory Group鈥檚 intense focus.

My experience growing up in a self-contained gifted class with nothing but other students of color from low-income neighborhoods across Brooklyn was special. I never, ever heard that getting good grades was 鈥渁cting white,鈥� because we did not know any white students who could show us what 鈥渁cting white鈥� was. I grew up with a mindset that black people and the children of immigrants were supposed to be brilliant, because that鈥檚 all I ever saw, all I ever knew. De Blasio鈥檚 School Diversity Advisory Group鈥檚 focus on integration seems based on Brown v. Board of Education鈥檚 conclusion that separate is inherently unequal. But in a school system where , the issue should be that unequal is inherently unequal. Contracting already-limited opportunities for accessing gifted and talented programs is a guaranteed way to continue to leave genius on the table.

Colin Seale is a critical thinking expert, achievement-gap-closing educator and attorney who founded 鈥� an award-winning program that helps educators teach critical thinking to all students using real-life legal cases and other Socratic and powerful inquiry strategies. He is a national speaker who contributes to Forbes and Education Post.

In their place, the advisory group suggested opening magnet schools focused on various areas of interest. The goal, as with all recent NYC school initiatives, has nothing to do with raising the academic achievement of all students and everything to do with achieving the mayor鈥檚 and schools chancellor鈥檚听 鈥� to the exclusion of everything else.

Currently, while the majority of NYC public school students are black and Hispanic, the majority of those in G&T programs are white and Asian. (In addition, more than half of students of all races who qualify for the program听don鈥檛 get a seat because there aren鈥檛 enough to go around.)

Removing G&T screening, according to the above proposal, would allow students of all abilities to gain admission to any magnet school that caters to their interests. Once students of all academic abilities are learning side by side, the low achievers will magically absorb high achievement through their peers via osmosis, and high achievers will benefit, too 鈥� somehow.

鈥淪imply put, there are better ways to educate advanced learners鈥� than G&T programs, according to the just-released report. The best being themed magnet schools specifically geared to applicants鈥� interests.

If that were the case, then all students at the NYC magnet schools that already exist should currently be performing at or above grade level, right?

Let鈥檚 take a look:

At 鈥� there鈥檚 a name that brings to mind high achievers! 鈥� 44 percent of elementary school students were at grade level in English Language Arts and 27 percent were at grade level in math.

At the听, a middle school, the stats were 41 percent proficient in English and 38 percent proficient in math.

At the听, it鈥檚 30 percent for English, 22 percent for math.

At听 鈥� another name that suggests it鈥檚 the perfect fit for kids passionate about both topics 鈥� it鈥檚 51 percent performing at grade level in English, 47 percent in math. Which, to be fair, is around city average. This elementary school isn鈥檛 worse than other NYC schools. But it also isn鈥檛 better. And with math scores actually lower than English, it suggests that the aspirational theme isn鈥檛 exactly fulfilling its potential.

There are other examples, but I鈥檒l leave it at that. Magnet schools are clearly not a magic bullet when it comes to raising student achievement.

Then there鈥檚 the issue of admissions. Right now, the majority of NYC students attend their zoned elementary school. Due to housing patterns, those schools are de facto segregated, with most white students congregated in a minority of high-performing schools. (I say de facto because it鈥檚 not as if a black or Hispanic student residing in the zone would be turned away; it鈥檚 just that very few low-income students of color live in high-income, mostly white neighborhoods.)

When it comes to admissions, magnet schools would operate more like unzoned schools. These are open to all children in a given district, or sometimes even in the entire city, and admission is by lottery, so parental income and educational level shouldn鈥檛 be a factor.

Parental income and educational level are always a factor.

The fact is, because unzoned schools, by definition, have no attendance zone, families need to first know that these schools exist. Then they have to know how to apply. And, finally, they have to know how to听 when they don鈥檛 get in on the first round.

Even if every single elementary school in NYC were unzoned and theoretically open to every single NYC family, do we really think that those parents with the time and resources to research schools wouldn鈥檛 have an advantage over families who鈥檇 simply write down the school closest to them, or the one where their kids have all gone historically?

This level of citywide choice is听. So why would it be the solution to segregation in K-5? (鈥檚 how a similar proposal worked out in San Francisco.)

Furthermore, because unzoned schools don鈥檛 use residency or a test score as the basis for admission, how can anyone prove that all admissions were done on the up and up?

An example from :

District 4鈥檚 unzoned Central Park East I was founded in 1974 to bring the children of East Harlem a hands-on, progressive, art-focused education. Now, in 2016, only 24 percent of the student body resides in District 4. In fact, 29 percent live in District 3, and only 25 percent of the school鈥檚 enrollment qualifies for free lunch, at odds with the district鈥檚 broader demographics. District 4 parents have even gone so far as to听 of deliberately keeping local families away in favor of more affluent ones from other districts via a manipulated waitlist. The school responded that it was committed to enrolling parents who were in sync with their progressive model.听

Does anyone really believe that won鈥檛 be the case if all NYC schools are turned into unzoned magnets?

With the heightened possibility of corruption and no evidence whatsoever that magnet schools would, in fact, increase diversity or raise student achievement, why should NYC parents accept that this change would be any kind of improvement over the current system?

Alina Adams is a New York Times best-selling romance and mystery writer, the author of Getting Into NYC Kindergarten and Getting Into NYC High School, a blogger at and mother of three. She believes you can’t have true school choice until all parents know all their school choices 鈥� and how to get them. Visit her website, .

It was the first school of choice created in San Antonio Independent School District by Superintendent Pedro Martinez, who saw offering a gifted and talented program that did not used screened admissions as a way to draw more affluent families from outside the district while providing the kind of “higher order” learning shown to be invaluable in raising academic achievement. Such approaches are typically not available to students of color because they are rarely screened for gifted and talented programs.

The other part of ALA’s winning formula: a teacher-training program with nearby Trinity University, whose school of education is one of the best in the nation, that has allowed San Antonio to grow its own top-flight talent pipeline. “Very exciting things are happening within San Antonio ISD,” ALA Principal Kathy Bieser said. “Our goal to become a national leader in urban education is happening, and I think we are on the right path to really transform this school district.” Read more about the district鈥檚 broader school integration effort and how it is raising student achievement. (Click right here to read 蜜桃影视’s special report)

鈥� Video Produced by Heather Martino; Edited by James Fields

At a Sunday press conference, the mayor said 鈥渢he stars have aligned鈥� behind his proposal to discontinue using the test that by law has been the sole criterion for admission to the schools, which include the prestigious Stuyvesant, Bronx Science, and Brooklyn Tech, for nearly a half-century. He would replace it with grades, state test scores, and other measures, and then select the top performers from every middle school.

But alumni groups hit back on Monday, blasting the mayor鈥檚 effort to quickly push a bill through the Assembly without public comment, while organizations representing Chinese immigrants 鈥� whose children make up a significant proportion of the student population at the specialized schools 鈥� called the proposal 鈥渞acist鈥� and promised to fight against it.

Following the bold proposal and the emotional backlash, seven key questions about the path forward for the top high schools in America鈥檚 largest school district:

1 Why now?

It鈥檚 easy to see why the mayor is confident in his timing; cultural winds are gathered at his back. School desegregation has emerged as a central concern, and he has bet that its proponents, while unhappy with what they saw as a tepid plan to diversify city schools last year, will energize around the new cause.

The use of standardized exams as a measure of academic ability has lost luster as well. Heavy testing loads in state accountability systems were challenged in New York and elsewhere. The list of colleges that no longer require the SAT or ACT continues to grow (most top-tier schools still require them). provides a limited picture of a student鈥檚 gifts and potential.

In an analysis I wrote last month of New York City enrollment data, I also found that the tests helped push the city鈥檚 top boys and girls to sort themselves into different types of schools.

De Blasio鈥檚 new schools chancellor, Richard Carranza, has proved an ardent spokesman, coming out of the gate ahead of the mayor by scolding white parents who resisted integration in their neighborhood schools and criticizing not just specialized high school admissions but also screened schools, which enroll students based on grades, state scores, and the like 鈥� criteria similar to de Blasio鈥檚 prescription for the specialized schools.

2 Does the mayor need state approval for his plan?

No 鈥� and yes.

The plan has two parts. The first is an expansion of the Discovery program, which gives a second try to low-income students who came close to passing the specialized test the first time. The mayor can do this unilaterally (and has in the past).

But the second and more important part depends on state legislators overturning or amending a that established test-only admissions. It鈥檚 a big assumption, but if that were to happen, the city would then gradually phase out the test over three years while moving to admissions based on identifying the top performers in each middle school.

In part one, the city would expand Discovery so that it produces 20 percent of specialized offers, up from 5 percent this year. Given past admissions trends, that鈥檚 about 1,000 seats.

There are a few problems. First, past efforts to expand Discovery haven鈥檛 worked. Chalkbeat reported that , but 78 percent of students offered admission under its auspices in 2017 were white or Asian (the city noted that a higher percentage of black and Hispanic students were admitted under Discovery than through regular admissions).

The new plan offers what it suggests is a fix: Only students in high-poverty middle schools will be eligible. The mix will be quite different: About 83 percent of students in these schools are black or Hispanic, according to the Department of Education, and 15 percent are white or Asian.

It鈥檚 worth noting that, as of 2017, 23.4 percent of Asian Americans in New York City live in poverty, . They are among the stoutest defenders of a system that has provided a piece of the American dream: an amazing 28.1 percent of specialized school offers between 2005 and 2013 went to students speaking Chinese at home, according to . That figure would decrease substantially under the de Blasio plan.

In all, Asian-American students make up 61 percent of the specialized high school enrollment, though they are just 16 percent of city students. White students account for about one-quarter of specialized school students and are 15 percent of city students overall.

3 Can the mayor secure support from state legislators?

Maybe 鈥� but not right away. The Assembly will consider this Wednesday to replace the test, but even with backing by the entire chamber, there鈥檚 no way forward until after November.

His failed effort to help Democrats win the state Senate in 2014 has left de Blasio persona non grata in the upper house, where Republicans force him each year to endure a late-into-the-night negotiation that ends each time in a one-year renewal of his control over schools. (By contrast, Mayor Michael Bloomberg received a six-year renewal.)

Should Democrats win the chamber outright in the fall (which is not at all clear), it鈥檚 conceivable that a combination of the zeitgeist and electoral interests could bring about at least a partial change to the law.

While unlikely, it might help if the mayor were able to bring around dissenting Democratic senators who represent districts that are home to large numbers of specialized school students.

In April, Democratic senators , whose district adjoins two Bronx specialized schools, and Toby Stavisky, whose Queens district includes a sizable Asian student population, announced legislation to expand Discovery and early screening for gifted students, and create a practice specialized test, akin to the PSAT, for all sixth-graders.

Neither contemplated changes to admissions policy, and Stavisky has publicly opposed the new proposal. Both graduated from Bronx High School of Science.

Similarly, while de Blasio can count on strong support from City Council, Education Committee chairman Mark Treyger has not endorsed the plan, perhaps because his south Brooklyn district includes a high-achieving Russian population. (Treyger鈥檚 office didn鈥檛 respond to a request for comment.)

The elephant in the room in all-important state policy discussions is Gov. Andrew Cuomo. Cuomo enjoys making life difficult for de Blasio, but with a re-election challenge on his left from actress Cynthia Nixon, he may have less leeway than usual. His initial tack has been to support the aim of integration while tossing water on de Blasio鈥檚 approach. 鈥淭he mayor raises legitimate concerns,鈥� Cuomo said Tuesday, adding, 鈥淚 don鈥檛 know that there鈥檚 much of an appetite in Albany now to get into a new bill, a new issue.鈥�

4 Does the mayor have the authority to change how the five newer specialized schools admit students?

It seems so.

The two-year expansion of Discovery wouldn鈥檛 much offset the racial imbalance in the schools: Minority enrollment would increase to 16 percent from 9 percent, according to the city. The rest would depend on the disposition of the Senate.

But lawyers say the mayor can bypass Albany to implement the admissions changes he wants in the five specialized schools 鈥� The Brooklyn Latin School; High School of Mathematics, Science and Engineering at the City College of New York; High School of American Studies at Lehman College; Queens High School for the Sciences at York, and Staten Island Technical High School 鈥� that weren鈥檛 around when the testing law was codified.

鈥淚t鈥檚 a lack of political courage not to have separated out the five nonmandated schools from his proposal,鈥� said David Bloomfield, a professor of education law at Brooklyn College who has closely followed the issue. 鈥淚t seems that there鈥檚 no question that if he can designate them as specialized, he can un-designate them.鈥�

The schools were created by Mayor Michael Bloomberg .

The mayor has said city lawyers are investigating whether he has the authority to make the changes, which would likely be politically unpopular, particularly in the school communities. Bloomfield said de Blasio has made up 鈥渢he legal question out of whole cloth and buried it in the bowels of the corporation counsel.鈥�

If the specialized school plan stalls, the mayor may face increasing pressure to redesignate the five schools as something other than 鈥渟pecialized.鈥�

5 How will changing the student bodies at specialized schools affect other NYC schools?

No one鈥檚 quite sure.

If the mayor is able to win changes to the law, a three-year phase-out of the specialized test would culminate in admissions being offered to the top 7 percent of students, based on their academic records, in each middle school. A small percentage of seats would be saved for students in nonpublic schools who are new to the city or came close to qualifying. The model resembles the University of Texas鈥檚 鈥溾�� policy, an idea that has been floated among advocates for years.

The city estimates that, going forward, 45 percent of specialized offers would go to black and Hispanic students (almost as strikingly, the percentage of female students would rise from 44 percent to 62 percent).

But officials said they won鈥檛 be able to model changes at other high schools until they are able to see what the new specialized school enrollment looks like.

6 Who will oversee the plan once it starts?

Carranza and his team have overall ownership, but specialized schools typically function as closed-off cultures led by highly autonomous principals. Given what would likely be defining shifts in school culture, these leaders鈥� ability to manage change would go a long way in determining the plan鈥檚 success.

7 Is the proposal in the best interest of students?

Yes, and research backs it up.

Given what we know about the benefits of integration, about testing, about poverty, the status quo isn鈥檛 tolerable.

The racial, ethnic, and gender imbalances in specialized schools haven鈥檛 changed in decades. This year, five of the schools accepted 11 or fewer black students; three schools accepted five or fewer.

Of the 3,368 students enrolled last year at Stuyvesant, the city鈥檚 most decorated high school, only 106 were black or Hispanic.

In all, black and Hispanic students make up 10 percent of the enrollment in specialized schools even though they represent 70 percent of city students.