Archive for the ‘Progressives’ Category

Progressives Exhibit Woke Fragility Over Being Labeled Groomers

For people who love name-calling and mudslinging, progressives sure have their collective panties in a bunch over the word groomer. As the debate over Floridas Parental Rights in Education bill continues to rage, folks on the hard left are all kinds of upset because conservatives are giving them a small dose of their own medicine.

In case youve been living in a cave over the past few months, the issue started when far-leftists became angry at people for supporting the notion that teachers should not be instructing seven-year-olds on matters pertaining to gender identity and sexuality and cutting their parents out of the equation. Conservatives responded by referring to those pushing this type of ideology on schoolchildren as groomers.

Of course, these folks dont mean groomers in the traditional sense in which a pedophile grooms a child in order to victimize them. Nobody is saying teachers and people opposing Floridas law are trying to have sex with minors. But the fact that they want state employees to speak to children without their parents knowing is a form of grooming.

But now, high-profile leftists are whining about what they believe to be an unfair label after spending five years calling anyone to the right of Bernie Sanders Nazis and literally Hitler.

In Politicos newsletter, author Matt Friedman deceptively claimed the groomer term was being used to promote the false stereotype that gay people regularly prey on children to convert them into homosexuals. He wrote:

Lately, commentators on the right are characterizing these standards and laws as indoctrination or, arguably worse still, grooming. Thats playing on an age-old anti-gay trope that theres a compulsion among non-heterosexual people to convert vulnerable children to their sexual orientation. Nevermind that some of the organizations that have had the worst sexual abuse scandals have historically been anti-gay. Do you really need me to name them?

The New York Times published a piece featuring four progressive podcasters and columnists. These folks also chimed in on the cultural battle over school curriculum. Podcaster Jane Coaston took issue with the use of the term, referring to a right-leaning writer who has used it:

Rod Dreher, the conservative writer said that, oh, no, no, when were talking about grooming, were not talking about pedophiles which is ridiculous. But he essentially said that, oh, it means that an adult who wants to separate children from a normative sexual and gender identity to inspire confusion in them, which just reminds me of Anita Bryant in 1978, essentially arguing that homosexuals must recruit, and that all children are cisgender and heterosexual until something happens.

Former Vox editor Ezra Klein also complained about people being called groomers and even made a pathetic attempt to link it to conspiracy theory cult QAnon. He said:

And on the other side you have this groomer thing, which is an attempt to take QAnons view which is one reason its resonating on the far right that all of politics is an effort by Democrats to protect pedophiles and then find some way to sort of wink, wink that youre on board with that view of politics while saying its actually a little bit about something else.

Last, but not least, we have New York Times commentator Jamelle Bouie, who also pretended the term was being used specifically for members of the LGBTQ community. He said:

To go back to what weve been talking about, I think that something similar may happen with these bills. Screaming that your kids gay third-grade teacher is a pedophile or a groomer when you know that this person has been absolutely lovely to you, your child and your family its not going to fly, I think, for most people or for people outside of this narrow bubble.

Of course, these folks dont actually believe for a second that when conservatives use the term groomer, they are referring to the stereotype about members of the LGBTQ community. They know better.

The problem is that they know they or people in their camp have been engaging in this type of behavior for decades. Are conservatives inaccurately labeling some folks as groomers? Of course, they are in many not all cases. Does the term get its point across? Depends on who you ask, but for those who arent taking the progressive line on this, it is more likely to make sense.

But the left has no leg to stand on when it comes to the use of this particular political tactic.

Where were the folks on the left criticizing their comrades when they tried to convince the public that anyone who disagreed with them was a racist/sexist/homophobe/other slur? When Democrats were calling Republicans racist for disagreeing with Obamacare, we didnt see these folks call out anyone on their own side.

Democrats and the activist media have been comparing Trump supporters to people who gassed millions of Jews and killed millions more during World War II. There was nary a peep coming from the left.

Their president tried to lump in people who disagreed with the Democrats Voting Rights Act with the likes of Bull Connor and other purveyors of Jim Crow. Where was the pushback coming from his party?

Case in point.

Sure, there are a few on the left who will criticize their fellow leftists for engaging in this behavior. Jane Coaston is one of them. Conversely, there are folks on the right who will rightly point out that not everyone who questions Floridas law is supporting the sexual grooming of little kids. But this is the world the far-left has created. These are the rules they wanted to play by. Like Ive said before, dont dish it out if you cant take it.

Now, would American political discourse be much healthier if neither side engaged in this behavior? Of course it would. It would also be nice if someone gave me a million dollars, but that aint happening today, is it?

What we are seeing is progressives losing a battle they thought they could win. Although, for the life of me, I cant figure out why they thought arguing against parental rights and promoting teaching sexuality and gender identity to small children was ever going to be a winning issue. But they are now dealing with backlash coming from Democratic and Republican voters alike. They dont like being hit with that label. But if they didnt want this to happen, they shouldnt have started it in the first place.

Read more here:
Progressives Exhibit Woke Fragility Over Being Labeled Groomers

Jonathan Zimmerman: Progressives have turned a deaf ear to minority …

I live in Philadelphia, a hugely unequal city. Our access to education, transportation and health care and the quality of these services often depends on our ZIP codes. And nobody knows that better than people who live in minority communities.

So lets suppose I said theyre wrong. Sure, they think they need better services. But they dont know what theyre talking about, and the rest of us dont need to listen to them.

Progressives would be outraged and rightly so. The residents in our minority neighborhoods want to be afforded the same dignity and opportunities as anyone else. Its callous and, yes, racist to ignore their wishes.

Except, it appears, when it comes to policing. Poor and minority people want more police on their streets. And progressives arent listening.

Consider a recent survey by the Pew Charitable Trusts, which found that roughly two-thirds of Black and Hispanic citizens in Philadelphia dont believe the city has enough police officers, whereas white people were more than twice as likely as Black citizens to say that there are too many police. And the people who said the city had enough or too many police were also more likely to have a college degree and an annual income of over $100,000.

You dont need a criminology degree to figure out why. As the same survey confirmed, over half of Black and Hispanic residents in the city reported that gun violence has affected their quality of life, while a little less than 20% of white citizens said the same. Minority communities face more danger, so they want more policing. And white and wealthier communities have less to fear, so theyre less likely to demand more police.

Its not just a Philly thing; we can see the same trend in national polling. And African American elected officials are taking note of it. In New York, Chicago and San Francisco, Black mayors have called for more police. And here in Philadelphia, Councilwoman Cherelle Parker has led a charge to add 125 officers to the citys strapped police force.

The response from many progressives? Police are the problem, not the solution. We can get more surveillance, more cops patrolling the streets harassing our neighbors, but we cant actually get safety with that, said Kris Henderson, executive director of the Amistad Law Project. Instead, Henderson argued, the city should devote resources to what minority communities really need: education, health care and so on.

But thats a false dichotomy, as the Pew survey confirms. Of course, our poor and minority communities need and deserve much better social services. But they also need more police officers, as residents of those communities have made clear. Theres nothing inconsistent about wanting both.

Nor is there anything contradictory about demanding better policing along with more officers. Racial profiling and brutality remain endemic problems on many municipal police forces. Thats why fewer than half of all respondents in the Pew survey said they feel confident that police in their community treat Black and white people equally.

But minority residents think thats a reason to improve policing, not to reduce it. So why wont progressives listen to them?

One answer lies in what political analyst Ruy Teixeira calls the Fox News Fallacy: If something appears on right-wing media, anyone who repeats it must be wrong. Turn on Fox, and youll see an endless loop of crime stories plus demands to step up policing. So if you want more police on our streets, the story goes, youre enabling the other team.

Nonsense. The best way to empower Fox News and to elect Republican candidates in November is to dismiss minority concerns around policing. Ignoring them will confirm the GOP narrative about progressives as out-of-touch elitists, who hate on the police from the safety of their Uber rides and doorman-protected apartments.

I dare you to tell someone who lives with gun violence every day that we need less policing. And then tell me how you can call that progressive. Im listening.

Jonathan Zimmerman teaches education and history at the University of Pennsylvania. He is the author, with cartoonist Signe Wilkinson, of Free Speech and Why You Should Give a Damn.

Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email letters@chicagotribune.com.

Read this article:
Jonathan Zimmerman: Progressives have turned a deaf ear to minority ...

Progressives Win Some, Lose Some in House Primaries – New York Magazine

Marquee progressive House candidate Jamie McLeod-Skinner of Oregon. Photo-Illustration: Intelligencer: Photo: Jamie McLeod-Skinner Campaign

On the night of May 17, Democratic progressives were pleased with the statewide victories of John Fetterman in Pennsylvanias U.S. Senate primary and of Tina Kotek in Oregons gubernatorial primary. But even as the defenestration of Madison Cawthorn in a North Carolina Republican primary soaked up much of the attention paid to House races, there was drama on the Democratic side. In each of these states, progressives faced centrists with mixed results.

The left appears to have won the evenings marquee House primary in Oregon as Jamie McLeod-Skinner holds a strong lead over seven-term incumbent Kurt Schrader, a Blue Dog heretic and pharma favorite who was nonetheless endorsed by President Biden. The only real doubt stems from a ballot problem in Schraders stronghold of Clackamas County that is slowing results there, but its unlikely Schrader will win by a big enough margin in Clackamas to surmount McLeod-Skinners overall 6139 lead with more than half the vote counted. The district leans Democratic but could become a GOP target in November. Among other things, McLeod-Skinner is attempting to become the West Coasts first openly lesbian member of Congress.

Another big (and still unofficial) progressive win came in Pittsburgh, where a House seat held by 14-term incumbent Democrat Mike Doyle seems to have been won by state legislator Summer Lee, who edged out attorney Steve Irwin. Doyle endorsed Irwin to succeed him, while Lee was backed by Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren. But much of the drama in the race stemmed from Irwins heavy backing by the United Democracy Project, a group created by the pro-Israeli organization AIPAC. The UDP poured over $2 million into the contest, reportedly out of concern for Lees regular criticism of Israels treatment of Palestinians.

The UDP (and Democratic moderates) did better in North Carolina. In a relatively blue district in the northeastern part of the state, the primary to succeed another veteran House Democrat, Congressional Black Caucus member G.K. Butterfield, was easily won by State Senator Don Davis, who has supported some abortion restrictions in the legislature. Davis was endorsed by Butterfield and benefited from UDP spending motivated by some criticisms of Israel from former state legislator Erica Smith, who was backed by Warren and several progressive groups. Similarly, in a Research Triangle district represented by retiring longtime congressman David Price, Durham County commissioner Nida Allam, the first Muslim woman to hold an elective office in North Carolina, drew strong national and local progressive support, but she lost the primary to State Senator Valerie Foushee, a Black legislator backed by the AFL-CIO, EMILYs List, and UDP. Aside from more conventional sources of campaign cash, Foushee benefited from sizable donations from eccentric crypto billionaire Sam Bankman-Frieds Protect Our Future PAC, which has selectively and massively become involved in the 2022 Democratic primaries.

Another Protect Our Future beneficiary in an ideologically charged primary was Kentucky state senate minority leader Morgan McGarvey, who was running against state legislator and racial-justice advocate Attica Scott in a Louisville district being vacated by retiring congressman John Yarmuth. McGarvey was endorsed by Yarmuth and heavily outspent Scott, who was backed mainly by progressive organizations; McGarvey won by a comfortable margin.

But the biggest spending explosion by Protect Our Future came in Oregons Fifth District (which includes the state capital, Salem), where the PAC threw in over $11 million on behalf of first-time candidate Carrick Flynn, who lost to state legislator Andrea Salinas. This wasnt so much an ideological contest as a test of Bankman-Frieds clout; he apparently backed Flynn heavily because of their shared commitment to effective altruism, a data-based philosophy concerned especially with long-term pandemic-prevention measures. Somewhat mysteriously, Flynn drew serious money from a PAC associated with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi as well.

The perennial struggle for the soul of the Democratic Party will continue in future midterm primaries, but its off to a good start with victories by both sides on Tuesday.

Daily news about the politics, business, and technology shaping our world.

By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms and Privacy Notice and to receive email correspondence from us.

Read this article:
Progressives Win Some, Lose Some in House Primaries - New York Magazine

Alaska progressives fear a shutout in the 48-way race for US House – Anchorage Daily News

A ballot for the June special primary election. (Anne Raup / ADN)

This story originally appeared on Alaska Public Media and is republished here with permission.

For weeks, Fairbanks mathematician Leah Berman Williams was in a quandary over which candidate to vote for in the special primary for U.S. House. Shes a Democrat and sees several good choices among the 48 people running. And that poses a double dilemma: Who is her favorite, and who does she think is the favorite of other left-of-center voters?

There are five or six that I think would be excellent, she said. Are any of those candidates going to make it through the gauntlet of the primary? And should I even bother to be thinking strategically?

Williams is looking forward to the special general election in August, when shell have a chance to rank four candidates. But in this special primary, she can only choose one. Her fear is that progressive voters will split their vote every which way so that none of their candidates will advance.

I worry about that a lot, she said. I have seen no consensus theres no coalescing around a single progressive candidate.

Williams isnt the only one concerned about that. Theres an angst gnawing at Alaskas liberals as they contemplate the special primary election to fill the remainder of the late U.S. Rep. Don Youngs term. The feeling isnt as acute on the right. The left has a smaller share of the Alaska electorate to start with. They feel they cant afford a split.

On social media you can find them casting about, testing strategic theories and taking each others temperature with Twitter polls.

Vote for Al Gross, some say, because hes got the best name recognition. Others fret that he wont capture enough of the Democratic vote, now that the Democratic Party has broken with him.

The far left is drawn to Santa Claus, the North Pole City councilman, for his ideological purity. But some question his viability since he isnt accepting campaign contributions.

Many Democrats like former legislator Mary Peltola but worry labor voters wont forgive her 2005 vote to cut teacher retirement, which she calls the biggest regret of her legislative career.

They also like Anchorage Assemblyman Chris Constant but wonder if hes got statewide appeal.

And so it goes. What progressive voters fear is squandering their votes and allowing four conservatives to advance.

[In a special U.S. House race, Alaska Democrats see opportunity]

Pollster Ivan Moore says theres not much chance of a shutout, by either side. He conducted a poll in early May that was not commissioned by any candidate or campaign. The situation is fluid, and campaigning could change the picture significantly, he noted.

I hate to say this, but to a certain extent, youve got to take things with a pinch of salt, because therell be a lot of jumping around, right? This really is a snapshot in time, he warned.

So, with those caveats in mind: His poll showed Republicans Sarah Palin and Nick Begich were leading the pack, followed by Gross. (The poll was conducted around the time the Democratic Party denounced Gross for sounding non-committal about which side hed caucus with if elected.) After those three, a lot of candidates were bunched in the middle.

Looking at the top 5 Republican candidates, Moore says its not clear more than two will advance.

Most of the Republicans have gone over and voted for one of Sarah Palin, or Begich, and that doesnt leave much for the other three, he said. So its going to be tough for them.

If Moore is right about that, the concentration of Republican votes on two candidates virtually assures that conservatives cant be shut out, and it leaves room for one or two non-Republicans to advance.

And yet the liberal angst is real.

Anchorage health care professional Carrie Harris feels it.

I really like Chris Constant. I really like Mary Peltola. And Santa Claus, she said.

Shes holding on to her ballot while she listens to friends and people on social media whose opinion she values to learn more.

Im not a numbers-cruncher, she said. I want to vote intelligently but really, for this election, strategically is more important to me, to make sure that we get a truly viable candidate.

[Some of Alaskas US House candidates are millionaires. Another is paying off student loans.]

As for Williams, the mathematician in Fairbanks, she gave up on working the numbers and just chose the candidate she likes best.

I think the primary, with 48 people its just too complicated to be trying to strategize our way into the general, Williams said.

Williams filled in the oval for Peltola, added the necessary signatures and dropped her ballot in the mail on Sunday.

For voters still deciding, ballots must be postmarked by June 11.

View original post here:
Alaska progressives fear a shutout in the 48-way race for US House - Anchorage Daily News

Genius Move? NYC’s Black Mayor Bucks Progressives on the Racial Chessboard of ‘Gifted’ Education – 69News WFMZ-TV

Mayor Eric Adamsplanto save accelerated education in New York City from progressive critics begins with students like Cassy Thimes daughter: a black second-grader who would thrive in a gifted classroom that today includes few kids of color.

Shes a top student and a gifted program will give her a more rigorous education and push her to excel, said Thime, who has a doctorate in education and lives in Queens. Now she has classmates who cant even read.

Adams, who took office in January, is diving headfirst into a controversy over academically selective schools thats dividing communities from San Francisco to Fairfax County, Va.

New Yorks second black mayor rejects the criticism that accelerated learning is racist and must be dismantled because of the low number of students of color who qualify. He believes they should strive for an elite education, too. To help them, Adams and his new schools chancellor, David Banks, are staking a middle ground that embraces both competitive academics and diversity. If this longshot strategy works, New York could influence districts across the country.

As Banks sees it, the problem with selective schools boils down to scarcity there are too few seats for advanced students in elementary, middle, and high schools for all who merit one. So the solution is pretty obvious: Create more elite schools and programs.

New York is starting with the addition of 1,100 seats to the gifted and talented (G&T) program for elementary students this fall. Identifying more advanced black and Latino students from the get-go means they will be bettered prepared to qualify for New Yorks elite middle and high schools like Stuyvesant, Bronx Science, and Brooklyn Tech schools that are under constant attack from progressives for admitting just a handful ofblacks and Latinos.

To ensure that blacks and Latinos fill more of the seats in the expanding G&T program, Adams also has to change the admissions process. Citywide testing, in which all students across New York compete against each other for admission, has been an obstacle. Minority students (not including Asians) took only 16% of the gifted seats prior to the pandemic while making up about 63% of all elementary students, with whites and Asians occupying about 75% of the gifted slots, according to city data.

For this reason, Banks is dropping the citywide written test, which was taken mostly by white and Asian students whose parents signed them up. Now all preschool students will be evaluated by teachers for admission, and the top performing second-graders in each elementary school will also be invited to apply. This approach, employing what academics call local norms, means that students will compete against others in similar socioeconomic groups, reducing any academic advantage that growing up in wealthier school districts may provide.

The likely upshot is that a higher percentage of blacks and Latinos and a lower percentage of whites and Asians will be admitted into the gifted program, a racial rebalancing that has set off a backlash in other school districts. Asian parents in Fairfax County, Virginia, sued over a racial rebalancing at Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology and lost at the Supreme Court in April.

But G&T advocates in New York are open to the rebalancing, as long as the pie is expanding for everyone and the admissions process is standardized and transparent. Chien Kwok of the Parent Leaders for Accelerated Curriculum and Education, an advocacy group of mainly Asian Americans, hailed Adams plan for embracing the concept that gifted kids in all communities are entitled to a rigorous education.

In the past we were leaving gifted children behind, Kwok said. Now the program is expanding, its no longer a zero-sum game, so Im supportive.

Banks is also promising to bring a similar expansion to the citys selective middle and high schools in the future. If that happens, it would benefit tens of thousands of students in the nations largest school system and send a message nationwide that high academic standards and racial equity dont have to be at loggerheads.

A lot of people are going to watch carefully to see how well this works, said Jonathan Plucker, a professor at the Center for Talented Youth at Johns Hopkins University. And I'm very confident that it will eventually evolve into something that's going to be a huge plus for the country and a big win for excellence in education.

That may be a bullish view considering the obstacles ahead. Banks has been scathing in his criticism of the Department of Education he now leads, calling it a broken, top-heavy bureaucracy that has struggled to make progress over the years in its most basic tasks, such as teaching students to read at grade level.

To improve the gifted program, teachers most of whom are not certified to teach gifted students need to be trained. Nor does the city have anything like a well-designed and up-to-date curriculum to challenge gifted students. Currently, gifted instruction varies greatly from school to school, and often doesnt go much beyond the general education curriculum mandated by the state.

The chancellor will also have to contend with a dozen advocacy groups and parents in several of New Yorks 32 districts that are ideologically opposed to competitive academic programs that separate students by abilities. These groups, such as New York Appleseed, have lobbied for years to abolish accelerated schools and place students of wide-ranging abilities as much as six grade levels apart in the same general education classroom to reduce racial segregation. The advanced students will help those who are academically behind, the theory goes, and everyone wins.

Progressives came close to achieving their goal, called Brilliant NYC, at the end of Bill de Blasios run as mayor last year. They are appalled that Adams rejected it in favor of a G&T redesign that they consider inherently elitist and without value to any students.

The gifted and talented program is very contentious and this new administration is going backwards by expanding it, said Allison Roda, a professor of education at Molloy College who helped develop Brilliant NYC. Gifted and talented has always been used as a tool to segregate students and avoid integration.

The mayors buildout of gifted education, announced in April, was one of his first major policy decisions, reflecting an urgency to reverse the flight of wealthier families from the school system.

Even before the pandemic, according to Banks, families were leaving the troubled system in which 65% of black and Latino students never achieve reading proficiency. The enrollment drop has been most acute among younger, white, and affluent students, with the system losing almost 5% of students in pre-kindergarten through third grade in 2020-2021. That means less state funding for city schools.

One hundred and twenty thousand families decided to vote with their feet and to say we are going to find other alternatives for our children, Banks said in a speech on March 2. Thats an indictment of the work that we have done.

But the city is nowhere near the point of satisfying demand for accelerated education, even though G&T programs are typically no more expensive than general education classes. Today, the program reaches only a small fraction of students, with about 15,000 out of 65,000 rising kindergarten families vying for 2,400 seats, mostly in more affluent sections of the city. Manhattans upper west and east sides are rich in programs, while some low-income districts in the Bronx and Brooklyn have very few or none.

The long distance that young kids in low-income or remote areas have to travel to get to a G&T program is one reason so few blacks and Latinos participate. Cassy Thime, who lives with her daughter in Rockaway Beach, Queens, is more than eight miles from the nearest program.

By bringing the program to all school districts, and adding 100 new G&T kindergarten seats, Adams is taking a small first step in what needs to be a much bigger expansion if he hopes to meet the demand. The city is also creating 1,000 new seats for students in the third grade spread throughout all the districts an age when a childs giftedness becomes more apparent. Banks said the additional seats were the baseline, not the ceiling, of a program he expects to grow.

In order to be admitted to the gifted program in the past, four-year-old preschoolers had to earn a top score on a written test an approach that both sides in the G&T debate deemed inappropriate. Preschoolers have no experience with written tests, and they are far too young to understand that its a gateway to a better education through college.

The other problem is that black and Latino families have been less likely than whites and Asians to register for testing, partly because gifted programs dont exist in many poorer neighborhoods and parents may not have heard about them.

Banks says the screening of all kids in preschool provides the fix. Rather than giving students a test, preschool teachers will look for signs of giftedness in how children draw, read, speak, or add and subtract, and then recommend the top performers for the program.

But teacher screening comes with its own issues. For starters, preschool teachers currently lack the training to identify gifted traits a specialty in itself as they evaluate kids for the fall program. This opens the door to a selection process filled with bias, from a teachers subjective views of what constitutes giftedness to pressures from administrators to meet diversity goals.

Without deep intensive training, teachers often recommend the compliant children, not the one that's thinking out of the box, or the incessant questioner, or the one that's completely disorganized, said Elissa Brown, a former director of the Hunter College Gifted Center and co-president of GiftedNYS. So, you're going to get biased teacher ratings around who is gifted.

The separate pathway into the program for third-graders is almost certain to bring in many more black and Latino kids. The top 10% of students in every elementary school in the city, based on their second-grade marks in four core subjects, will be invited to apply. The pipeline will draw equally from wealthier schools with many white students in places like in Park Slope, Brooklyn, and threadbare schools with mostly kids of color in areas like Harlem.

This local norms approach has significantly boosted diversity in gifted programs in places like Montgomery County, Maryland, and Houston. In Colorados Aurora Public Schools, a pilot project drawing students from 10 elementary schools into a gifted program shrank the underrepresentation of Latinos to 7% from 17%, and blacks to 2% from 6%. The success of the pilot prompted the district to expand it to another 10 schools, according to Scott Peters, a professor of education at the University of Wisconsin-Whitewater who co-authored a paper on the use of the local norms admissions process.

The controversy over G&T is partly a result of Americas scattershot commitment to educating gifted children. New York is one of eight states that have no requirements around gifted instruction, which means many upstate cities like Binghamton and Buffalo ignore it, Brown said.

New Jersey is one of about 25 states that require schools to offer gifted programs for students. Only 16 states, including North Carolina, also provide additional funding for such programs.

As a result, G&T education is a mishmash for the estimated 10% or more of public school students whom researchers have identified as gifted. G&T guidelines, data collection, accountability, oversight of programs, as well as teacher training are spotty across the country and hinder efforts to make improvements, according to the 2019reportby the National Association for Gifted Children.

The quality of gifted instruction also varies greatly. For elementary grades, the most common style differentiated instruction is also the most superficial: Advanced kids are given extra or harder worksheets in a general education classroom, or are asked to be de-facto teacher assistants to help other kids, Brown said. In increasing intensity, other approaches pull kids out of class for a few hours a week or cluster them in groups of four to six with a separate curriculum within general education classrooms. The most robust approach puts gifted students in their own dedicated classroom or entire school the practice used in New York City.

As a result, G&T education is a mishmash for the estimated 10% or more of public school students whom researchers have identified as gifted. G&T guidelines, data collection, accountability, oversight of programs, as well as teacher training are spotty across the country and hinder efforts to make improvements, according to the 2019 report by the National Association for Gifted Children.

The quality of gifted instruction also varies greatly. For elementary grades, the most common style differentiated instruction is also the most superficial: Advanced kids are given extra or harder worksheets in a general education classroom, or are asked to be de-facto teacher assistants to help other kids, Brown said. In increasing intensity, other approaches pull kids out of class for a few hours a week or cluster them in groups of four to six with a separate curriculum within general education classrooms. The most robust approach puts gifted students in their own dedicated classroom or entire school the practice used in New York City.

The concern among researchers is that popular approaches like differentiated instruction dont give gifted children anywhere near the challenge they need to thrive. The gap between the abilities of average and gifted students is too wide for a teacher to adequately instruct all of them at the same time.

Consider IQ: The average score in the U.S. is about 100; most gifted students score at least two to three standard deviations above that, or 120 to 130.

These students are at least one or two grade levels ahead in at least one subject, she said. There are fourth graders who can handle algebra. So why are they still doing simple computation?

The expansion of gifted education in New York is part of the chancellors larger turnaround attempt of the citys $38 billion-a-year Department of Education. Banks, a former school safety officer, teacher, and principal who has butted heads with the bureaucracy in the past, almost immediately eliminated the department position of executive superintendent, saving millions in salaries. He also plans to redeploy DOE bureaucrats into the classrooms where they can help understaffed schools.

To convey the challenges ahead, Banks told the story of a speech he gave at the historic Tweed Courthouse, the grand Romanesque building that serves as the departments headquarters. As Banks was starting his talk, the teleprompter broke, forcing him to ad lib.

Its a classic example, $38 billion, and we cant even get the teleprompter to work, he said in March at The Forum at St. Barts. There are so many pieces of the system that are dysfunctional. Its a massive turnaround.

Go here to read the rest:
Genius Move? NYC's Black Mayor Bucks Progressives on the Racial Chessboard of 'Gifted' Education - 69News WFMZ-TV