How Lack Of Funding Effects Gifted Students In Ohio
This year is a landmark year for Gifted Education in Ohio; for the last few years the number of gifted children in Ohio has been growing steadily. This year for the first time the percentage of children in Ohio that were identified as Gifted and Talented finally equaled the percentage of children who were served in Special Education Classrooms. There is only one small problem with this statement. The percentage is equal only if you count the students who are identified as being Talented and Gifted, not served. There are currently only 11% of all Talented and Gifted students being served in the State of Ohio.
The Ohio
…show more content…
Ohio now requires school district to test students to see how gifted they are, and to notify parents that there students are talented and gifted, but does not require that school districts do anything to enhance or accelerate that child’s education. The state would never consider doing this to a child in special education, but it is well accepted in gifted education.
The Ohio Department of Education beliefs that gifted children can make it on their own and do not need special services. This is not true, high percentages of students become underachieves and never attend college. Many are discipline problems, eventually dropout, and many commit suicide. Many gifted students who stand out in classrooms, are often used as a tutor for the other students. This only further excludes them from learning and makes them stand out to ridicule.
The No Child Left Behind law is commonly referred to as the No Child Pushed Forward law in the gifted community. This is due to the fact the classrooms are required to assure that every child meets basic requirements, however once gifted children meet these requirements they are required to wait and practice a few more times while every catches up. This law has helped many slow learning students, but it has impeded many gifted students.
Gifted Education while a section of Special Education is not required to fill out
In 2015, I wrote about my personal philosophy of the gifted learner. I stated in my paper that, “Giftedness is not a one, set definition. The definition of gifted must encompass intellect, ability, creative talent as well as emotional awareness. It cannot be micro-managed and be a “one size fits all” definition” (Dauber, 2015). People, who are gifted, need differentiation and opportunity to express, demonstrate and show their giftedness. Educators must be able to provide opportunities for the gifted learner to express his/her abilities and/or talents. Gifted students learn differently and require special educational experiences in order to grow academically and achieve their highest potential. Therefore, the education field must be able to understand not only the cognitive side of a gifted learner but the affective or social/emotional aspects too.
Before taking this course I took, “Introduction to Education.” During that course we spent a lot of time talking a lot about the Governments role in education and the growth of its role in education. We spent time talking about how states and local governments were primarily responsible for the education process. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and No Child Left Behind (NCLB) was also discussed. Both of these laws offered great improvements to the education process but also had drawbacks. One drawback is as the book stated a lot of teachers have to teach what is contained in the test. Gifted children are not challenged and disabled children don’t always grow academically as quick as a normal student.
I evaluated the information in the document above based upon Moon’s (2013) nine measures to consider in comprehensive gifted education program. I think that FCCPS does a considerably good job addressing these nine guidelines. However, I believe they should consider more non-standardized materials and data while considering students for identification.
Adams County public school system’s current program doesn’t seem to recognize any minority or poor students who could be considered gifted. Educators in this district and committee members seem to lack any motivation to include diverse learners in their program. The fact that Adams County only recognized three out of four hundred thirty-eight over a five-year span is appalling. I feel Adams County need some major changes to extend their idea of giftedness. It needs to start with intensive and in-depth teacher training along with community outreach and awareness programs to help educate parents about giftedness. For instance, parent could learn ways to better support their children and help identify their child’s areas of giftedness.
The United States is a country based on equal opportunity; every citizen is to be given the same chance as another to succeed. This includes the government providing the opportunity of equal education to all children. All children are provided schools to attend. However, the quality of one school compared to another is undoubtedly unfair. Former teacher John Kozol, when being transferred to a new school, said, "The shock from going from one of the poorest schools to one of the wealthiest cannot be overstated (Kozol 2)." The education gap between higher and lower-income schools is obvious: therefore, the United States is making the effort to provide an equal education with questionable results.
The no child left behind was a U.S Act of Congress that was create to reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. The no child left behind was affects what students are taught, the tests they take, the training of the teachers, and the way money is spent on education. However it did not improve the education system since it was used to measure the student improvement in order to receive federal funding and if the school didn’t do good on these tests they lose their federal funding which means that the students from these school was not going to receive a good education. In addition, the no child left behind was not successful because teachers will focus more time on math, science, and English and annoy the other subject. Students
The No Child Left Behind’s purpose is to improve the education by creating a standard in which all students should meet the requirements. These standards consist of all students meeting proficient or above in reading and math by 2014. Similarly
Recently, I read an article called “America Hates Its Gifted Kids”. This article is about how America; one of the greatest economical leaders in the world, is lacking substantially in educational intelligence. The country is also treating its gifted kids with little to no courtesy when it comes to education. The author, Chris Weller, has been a reporter for many different publishing businesses and likes to focus his reports mainly on how different worlds overlap. He talks about how the United States educational system focuses more on helping their lowest scoring children reach the minimal standards, while it is also taking away valuable time from the higher scoring children. I agree with Chris Weller entirely; The education system today takes
The no child left behind program is one program that all parents and teachers should look in because it improves the child's teaching ability, learning, and school improvement skills. This type of program helps
The No Child Left Behind Act. At first glance, this act sounds like all it can do for the educational system is improve it. If no student is left behind then everyone can have equal opportunities right? But if teachers are constantly testing in order to measure progress, then students can be held back. No Child Left Behind Act(NCLB) requires testing in schools in order to help regulate education and to measure how qualified teachers are. Some argue that the NCLB act adds many positive aspects to the educational system. However, the negatives outweigh the positives. The act enforces testing thus limiting the teacher's freedom causing him or her to teach to the test. This form of teaching, in turn, inhibits the student’s creativity.
The need to reform the special education system is a topic agreed on across the board by scholars, but they do not all agree on the same aspects needing to be reformed. Baldwin, Baum, Pereles, & Hughes concentrate their research in developing a single accepted definition for twice-exceptional students. The authors created a timeline of what they consider the development of the history of twice exceptionality. The authors argue critics of Twice-Exceptional students do not accept the existence of a group of students gifted and disabled because there is not substantial proof (Baldwin, Baum, Pereles, & Hughes, 2015, p.211). The authors examine different approaches for establishing a unified solution to the gap in the education of twice-exceptional students. The premise of the author’s arguments are based on the acceptances of gifted students and disabled students, but not both combined. The revision of IDEA in 2004 began to open the door for the acceptance of the twice-exception field. “Significantly, the mention of students with disabilities who may also have gifts and talents was noted for the first time in the priorities for funding” (Baldwin, Baum, Pereles, & Hughes, 2015, p. 210). The authors use legal, educational and social lens when establishing their arguments. VanTassel-Baska’s focus is much the same as the previous authors. VanTassel-Baska examines the history of twice-exceptional students. The author suggests, “That gifted education policy is not coherent across the country, is controlled by state legislatures, and subject to annual scrutiny for continued and new funding” (VanTassel-Baska, 2018 p. 98). The author stresses the lack of coherence across the United States. The author suggests the issues surrounding twice-exceptional students are left to state level policy, therefore differ. The author further argues
Growing up in the New York Public Schools system, I realized many similarities and differneces today. In 1993 all 50 states had formulated policies (legislation, regulations, rules, or guidelines) in support of gifted education. The study portrayed state policy as uneven and called for a re-examination of present policies in light of research, experience, and developments in education, psychology, organization, and related fields. Further support for this reexamination included the climate of school reform and restructuring, the changing environment of society and schooling, and the diverse ways that local districts interpret and implement state rules. These findings still resonate today. I graduated high school in 1994 and the gifted and
Funding for special education students is, and historically, has always been, a complicated issue. Most people believe the federal government funds special education in the United States. “Understanding Special Education Funding” (2009), states that, on average, most states estimate that the federal government provides less than 15% of the money needed to fund special education services. This, in turn, leaves local school systems responsible for funding the remaining portion of special education services. This paper examines the history of special education laws and funding, the wide variance of funding that exists from state to state, and the problems created by a lack of funding.
School funding is a mix of different funding sources like federal, state, and local. About ninety percent of funding for education comes from state and local community. K-12 education has failed to keep up with high enrollment. Schools must spend to counter effects of poverty while many European countries alleviate these conditions through government spending. Currently more than forty percent of low income school get an extremely unfair share of state and local funds. Low income school are receiving inadequate funds for their school, whereas other schools in the United States are unfairly distributing their state and local funds. That is unfair to the low income schools because those schools really need the money for school books, field trips, etc. Funding for public schools has been quite unequal for years, but even though Americans are fully aware of this issue no one does anything to solve it. Researchers are trying to show them both sides of this unequal funding issue in public schools in order to help balance the distribution of educational funding.
Throughout my high school career I was in a gifted program and it was helpful to an extent, the only classes I felt truly challenged in were advanced placement English and Dual Enrollment Anatomy. The program was helpful because it helped pay for many college preparation tests, that my parents were unable to afford. However, in Virginia, there are Standards of Learning tests. These tests have caused teachers to teach a different way, they now teach to a test. Because teachers focus more on the students who are falling behind, bright students tend to be left behind and do not reach their full potential. Due to the lack of focus on the brighter students, many bright students fail or even quit school because their needs are not being met by the school system. Bright students are not excelling due to the lack of attention received by teachers, the lack of challenge, and the lack of commerce.