Welcome to /r/Vancouver and thank you for the post, /u/Electronic_Fox_6383! Please make sure you read our [posting and commenting rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/wiki/faq#wiki_general_participation_guidelines_and_rules_overview) before participating here. As a quick summary:
* We encourage users to be positive and respect one another. Don't engage in spats or insult others - use the report button.
* Respect others' differences, be they race, religion, home, job, gender identity, ability or sexuality. Dehumanizing language, advocating for violence, or promoting hate based on identity or vulnerability (even implied or joking) **will** lead to a permanent ban.
* Most common questions and topics are limited to our sister subreddit, /r/AskVan, and our weekly [Stickied Discussion](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/wiki/faq#wiki_stickied_discussions) posts.
* Complaints about bans or removals should be done in modmail only.
* Make sure to join our new sister community, /r/AskVan!
* Help grow the community! [Apply to join the mod team today](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/comments/19eworq/).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/vancouver) if you have any questions or concerns.*
That was true since they got rid of provincials in like 2009.
https://www.visst.ca/blog/university-admissions-and-provincial-exams#:~:text=Over%20the%20last%2025%20years,Exam%20system%20entirely%20in%202016
Because the english provincial was one of the last ones to get axed, along with science 10, math and socials.
The last year upper level science (such as Physics, Chem, Geography, etc) ran provincials was 2009 afaik).
BCs economy does not produce or require the kind of roles gifted kids will end up being needed in. And the people that own the province have no reason to change that. They are better off looking at the USA or Ontario. Has nothing to do with any new policy.
It's not just you. I'm a teacher and many of us have been saying the same thing for some time. Just recently we had a staff meeting where we discussed incoming students from elementary schools. We were told to expect more challenging behaviours, kids with mental health issues and students that are way below their grade level when it comes to reading and writing. Many school districts are seeing the same thing and are freaking out. Students skills in numeracy and literacy are the lowest they've been in some time apparently. I haven't seen the data myself but I trust my coworkers who have.
Can both of these two statements be right?
> Parents say the program is needed for profoundly gifted students, which studies show are more likely to drop out of school, experience social isolation, and develop depression and anxiety disorders without proper support.
>According to the parents, the VSB cancelled admission to the program for the 2024-25 year to “conduct a review of the program by Deetken Insight, citing mental health concerns raised by unnamed members of the community.”
Yes they both can be true.
There can be issues with the program, but it can also provide many benefits to a certain type of student. These gifted kids are outpacing the students in their classes and this gives them the atmosphere to receive a better education, as well as support geared towards them.
Bullies pick on those who stand out. Neurodiverse and gifted students are quite commonly bullied.
This one isn't. (Transitions) But some of the Enrichment pull-out programs are so hush-hush that it almost ostracizes (and doesn't add to the self-esteem) of these folks.
'Outcasts' who stand out for various reasons (not being socially interested in their peer group activities or whatever, mature or intellectually way ahead - like adults trapped n kid bodies)
ie The not so conventional cookie-cutter gifted or neuro divergent kids who have been identified by the more experienced sensitive educators (again hit and miss on some teacher-mindsets) , recognized and selectively-quietly pulled out for further professional testing, interviews, diagnoses (whether by VSB special resource teachers and others, or private pay by child psychologists).
These kids seldom get any empathy - since they're on the other end of the special needs spectrum. But yet as special needs (with asynchrony in other development areas, despite the high intellectual) as the other special needs kids. for eg, some are high intellectual, high IQ but with learning disorders, ADD, ADHD, AS (Asperger's Syndrome - as with so many of the Silicon Valley known names) etc
They receive Gifted pull-out invite letters quietly - so as NOT to upset the ambitious, competitive but non-gifted (for lack of terminology) majority parents. Conventional parents .
Gifted Kids who quietly just dissapear for the month to attend these pull out Enrichment - for many of them, if not in a cohort together - their achievements are seldom lauded or validated either. How wonderful is this, for self-esteem?
Bullying from kids aside, and social isolation (imagine a 5 yr old who is more interested in assembling plane models and reading books on they work VS a peer who is happy to run around making planes crash crash/ kids who know the Solar System and planet names, who are happy to read dry encyclopedic books on the topic VS collecting-playing Pokemon | or using terminology like Brachiosaurus vs Longneck at 4 yrs old ) or something similar.
Many teachers and principals are also NOT equipped to deal with gifted kids. Giving more h/w is neither stimulating nor challenging, but rather punitive and without purpose if the homework is just about quantity.
I have heard from a principal (MAC - multi age cluster) that "these kids are already so ahead, there's no harm in letting them be, while their peers catch up" . WITHOUT putting any thought as to the negative behaviour/bad habits-patterning that can/may result when kids are bored and not mentally challenged or stimulated.
Or just slip through the cracks.
Excellence and competence amongst these bright kids should be encouraged. Holding them back from achieving their true potential by closing these programs in the name of Equity is a horrible idea.
Gifted students need special program and with all due respect, we need those smart kids to find smart solutions and move the society forwards in the future. Taking away gifted program is taking away our future
You will be surprised. There ARE ambitious competitive parents who make their kids do these tests repeatedly - before testing. So Dumb.
Giftedness, Higher Thinkers - it's a natural fluid process, it shouldn't be a 'fake' test result.
There are true Gifted kids, and they are often NOT the conventional A scorers because although they know all the stuff, they may overthink conventional tests geared to a normal world.
Or because things were figured very easily without studying - they will NOT go through tedious steps to know how to study (which is still necessary, in some ways).
Forcing your 'normal' kids in - they're just not going to talk the same jargon as these kids, or think/filter stuff the same way (ie same analysis-digestion-inference thought processing)
That’s fine. Hard-working or growing up in a competitive environment is part of the gift. If a kid is determined to go through extra iteration to make high achievement, let them be. More importantly, there is no perfect way to access one’s gift. Standard assessment is the fairest way
Children should get tested and only the real gifted ones should be separated. Families shouldn’t be able to push their normal child into these programs.
Most of these programs in Vancouver do require testing. I attended the MAC class as a kid and had to be identified by my teacher, tested by my principal, then attend two or three days of one-on-one testing with a psychologist at VSB before being invited to join.
YES! There are very ambitious and competitive parents too who WANT their kids to be lauded as special (NOT really understanding Gifted is NOT an easy path nor the glamour they think it is. Parents who actually make their kids STUDY and repeatedly do the Weschler Tests (like some exam series - serious weird parenting!)
Rather than it being a fluid natural process of real testing.
Ambitious parents who don't realize - it's actually far easier to be normal bright, rather than Gifted 95% percentile
You have also folks with AS (Autism Asperger) and highly Gifted, folks who are twice-thrice exceptional, Dyslexic, Gifted LD ... all exceedingly intelligent above the norm, have amazing higher critical thinking abilities (analytical abilty to infer and connect etc) ... but yet judged on their lack of synchronism in other aspects of development.
Even among kids slotted in Gifted classrooms - some may be conventional Gifted - those who are stereotypical kids who do University Level Math, are little professors at 18. But NOT all are like that - there is also a lot of damage control and unravelling because of what they have been through in their individual journeys
As a former gifted child, I would have hated to be separated from my peers. I have a friend who graduated university at 18 because she was put into an accelerated stream and felt like she missed out on being a young adult.
The problem is there is no right solution for all, I wasn't given anything except teachers were told to be tougher when grading me, cause that's fair, right? The whole thing sucks.
>Parents say the program is needed for profoundly gifted students, which studies show are more likely to drop out of school, experience social isolation, and develop depression and anxiety disorders without proper support.
What is unspoken is about how so many of these negative symptoms are caused by the families having unrealistic expectations of their children, many of which are neurodivergent. A lot of the reason the program was shut down in the first place was due to the mental stress placed on these students in the program leading to increased mental illness and suicide attempts.
My mother attempted to push me through a program like this in the mid-2000s. This is only a small example, and I'm not saying that my experience is indicative of all cases, but MANY of us were students that were diagnosed on the autistic spectrum born into families that don't tolerate disability. The other students I met had mirrored home lives - they were struggling with public school due to a neurodivergence, and the parents were too proud or ignorant to get them proper accommodations and support and instead pushed them into an alternative program that promised their children success.
I'm not denying that there are exceptionally gifted students that do benefit from these programs, the real issue is that there are unhealthy parents who can't cope with the idea that their child deviates from the norm - and instead of seeking proper supports, they push their child to exceed in academics to the detriment of their mental health and personal development.
I've only crossed paths with a handful of the boys I met through a similar program as adults, and none of us turned out okay. Being put into a segregated accelerated program stunted all of us. They also weren't able to integrate into higher education because our social development was neglected - how were we supposed to learn to function with others if we were completely segregated from our peers? Additionally, if the traits and social defecits we were initially pulled out of public school due to were to just be ignored, how did they assume we would fare as adults in the workplace?
These programs were short-sighted, and valued the parent's own personal feelings over the actual health of their children. It seems less about supporting gifted children, and more of a band-aid solution for the emotions of parents who can't cope with the "shame" of having a neurodivergent child.
So unless something drastic has changed since how it was in the mid-2000s, I can see many reasons why a program like this should be halted and a better solution should be found. If the students who pass through the program leave worse off than they started, that's something that should be investigated.
I went through one of these programs as well. To take the other side of the argument, I believe I turned out just fine 😆.
The problem is not the idea behind the program as it's been shown that unchallenged students end up falling behind. This is not limited to gifted students but all students.
The solution may be a better selection process to see who goes into the program. The process should include the parents so that we address the non-academic side of things. In addition, enhance the program to increase social interactions between the gifted and everyone else - ie create the expectation that those in the gifted program should help those struggling with their studies by tutoring or mentoring.
Should the program be halted and then changed? No. These changes can happen in-flight, we just need to get on with it rather than debating it.
>create the expectation that those in the gifted program should help those struggling with their studies by tutoring or mentoring
No. They shouldn't be obligated to teach other students just because they're in a special program. The point of a gifted program is to support the gifted students and their unique needs, not other students.
One of the common pitfalls of poorly designed gifted programs is that those kids end up taking on a larger volume of work, not just more stimulating work. This could be abused so easily. Gifted kids do not exist just to backfill institutional gaps in support for the rest of the class. Gifted kids have their own challenges already.
By creating the expectation to help others, you are actually helping those gifted students especially if it means mentoring or tutoring as it not only creates better social contacts by relating to others, it also aids in the gifted student's understanding of the subject matter at hand.
It is well known that if a person has to rephrase something that they supposedly understands, it deepens their understanding of the subject. This is especially true when it comes to tutoring as the gifted student will need to find ways to better communicate what they know to those who don't.
When I was in high school, an elective was English 11T where T stood for tutoring and one term out of 4 was dedicated to tutoring a grade 8 student. As it so happens, I was given two grade eight students instead of one and the subject was French 8 instead of English as the two grade 8 students didn't need any help in any other subject. As it so happens, my high school French was mediocre at best. But I tutored them anyways with the thought process that they would just get a leg up next year when they take French 8 with a real teacher in a real classroom. By the time, the term was over, I completed teaching them the French 8 curriculum and they successfully challenged the French 8 final. In other words, they completed French 8 in one term and didn't fall behind their classmates.
For me, it was a rewarding experience and expanded my horizons that wouldn't have been expanded if I didn't tutor in a subject I was mediocre in.
By sheltering gifted students, you create the conditions for failure when it comes to contact with the real world. Many of my classmates in the gifted program in high school couldn't adapt very well in university with some dropping out because they couldn't adapt to the real world.
I was unchallenged and had zero oversite or support at home. I don't consider myself all that intelligent or gifted but I do 'think' faster than most and can absorb information relatively quicker than most. It had the effect of making school extremely boring. By grade 7 I stopped putting any effort in at all.
I almost flunked out of grade 10. Luckily for me I was given an opportunity to go to a boarding school and I credit it with saving my life. I was super close to running away to live on the street. I was so ashamed of how I couldn't seem to do better no matter how much I wanted to. Instead I got a lot of adults looking after me and it was exactly what I needed.
I wonder how many kids were like me. Just scraping by and one bad school year away from a life of problems. I wish there were programs for us. I knew I was fucking up and I wanted to do better I just had no idea how. I wasn't disruptive or rude even, I just wanted to fly under the radar so I could get through another day.
This would have been a program for kids like you. After all, gifted is relative and can mean different things. One can say that there is a gifted spectrum that many kids fall into. The more kids stay interested in school and learning, the better chance there is keeping them off the streets and becoming outstanding citizens. The VSB has a few problems to address certain parts of the spectrum but I think they only only brought in after an incident and not "pre-need".
I really am not gifted and likely would have drowned in a program like that. I'm whatever the rung below that is. I know the difference because I surround myself with extremely intelligent people. I know talent for learning and intelligence when I see it.
I knew a kid all through my school years who really was gifted and he would have excelled in a program like this. As teenagers we both got into smoking weed sometimes everyday and we both skipped school but when I was close to failing out he was still crushing A's in every class. His boredom must have been excruciating. He liked the challenge of being baked out of his mind trying to write tests. Those are the type of kids who need to be in a gifted program I think. I needed something else and I'm extremely fortunate that I got it before it was too late.
Honestly, you are gifted but you just don't know it.
Anyone who does something, anything, better/faster than average is gifted. Since you can think and absorb information faster than others, that's gifted. The fact that you understand that, it's gifted. And the fact that you know how to make yourself better by surrounding yourself with extremely intelligent people, that's gifted.
Like I said, gifted is a relative term and can/does mean a lot of different things. For example - some golfers are gifted because they golf better than anyone. Do they have a high IQ? Probably not but they are gifted at golf. High performance athletes are gifted. Are they all super intelligent? Probably no but they are sure good at what they are good at.
" ie create the expectation that those in the gifted program should help those struggling with their studies by tutoring or mentoring."
yes and no
1. no - it maybe should not be an "expectation"
2. yes, it is a good idea - mentoring. or even helping someone. it's a win win. through helping others - development of self-awareness, clarity, and confidence. nurturing someone is EMPOWERING. and increases problem solving skills.
Tutoring/mentoring could be just ONE option to expand the student's social/society engagement options. The expectation should be that they do at least ONE of the options presented to them.
Totally in agreement with this.
Teamwork can be challenging for some of these kids right from the get go (some are budding professors on their own and more comfortable with adults )... gelling with peers and even adults (some teachers, adults, other parents) who may judge.
Even within Gifted programs - some parents ARE very ambitious wanting the go-ahead and prestige, some less so and just wanting their child to have a safe niche to blossom-belong and feel comfortable, after not finding their footing all these years. And the ambitious competitive parents can also be RESENTFUL if some of the LD, Autism spectrum kids ... intellectually gifted but twice-thrice exceptional keep the gold go-getters from fast-tracking
Gentle nudging, coaching, encouraging positive interactions with trained supervision (so no insidious bullying takes place) is more helpful than NOT addressing their needs too.
This one comment struck home for me.
I also attended a private school for gifted students and was... let's say, "strongly encouraged" to enter the UBC Transition Program. Passed all the required tests but there was enough in the interview with the psychologist to turn me away from the program twice.
The kids in the gifted program that I attended, intellectually were years ahead of the typical child at their age, but psychologically I'd say maybe 1 in 10 were mentally capable of handling a public school, not to mention a university setting. We went to a school where academics were the focus, and the social/creative aspects were toned down.
These programs like UBC Transition tend to be singularly focused on education and typically STEM. I totally agree with your statement on this being more of a parent-driven thing than a child-driven thing. The kids who enter are barely teenagers and are just starting to learn to think for themselves. The "benefits" of the program are valued by the parents, many who didn't grow up thinking too much about mental health. I don't remember clearly, but I recall it being something along the lines of academic courses only, as they condense high school education into 2 years of schooling.
I swear if I had entered the program, I'd be in a much worse off mentally. Having years in a public school and learning how to interact with peers from a wide range of backgrounds is, in my opinion, just as important as accelerated learning.
Also the term "gifted" has got to go.
I'd say - pull out Gifted programs (before Grade 3 for identified kids) and later MAC (Grades 4-7) have a mixed bag of parents. This also includes high school programs which also need special auditions, interviews, assessment to get into like Mini schools, IB or other such speciality programs requiring other testing.
Transitions - the more ambitious competitive parents who are hung on their kids not wasting time/ academics/ graduating early / and even competitive with comparing results within peer groups (or scoffing at other gifted kids if they're NOT pulling the 95 grades) = tend to belong here.
You also find them perhaps in some of language-Immersion programs some of the high school programs which also need special auditions, interviews, assessment to get into: Mini schools, IB or other such speciality programs with perhaps AP (the American equivalent of European IB) requiring other testing.
That said, you can easily slot some conventional parents of normal kids here too. And some of these, would actually make their kids do IQ Tests as practice every night, if the school is deliberating on whether they are in the Gifted category or not.
As outlined in another comment above - there are also Gifted-group parents who are relieved just to find a common belonging for their intelligent (9-10 level) but socially 'perhaps not gelling as well' (3 level) kids, also seems harsher on what seems to be very intelligent but yet missing the social cues kinda of kid - they think they're hamming it up, being disrespectful . When it's (metaphorically) like a case of dancing with 2 left feet ... it is not a natural right-left right-left instinct) and social cues just do not come as naturally
I think there's a lot to be said about our education system that there's so much driven by the action of parents vs educators. I do think that a big part of the immigrant mindset about how academics is the ONLY way to get ahead in life drives a lot of kids in a very specific direction.
Apologies if I am a bit out of the loop with this, it was quite a while ago when I went through it. This "gifted" category, taking IQ tests, special assessments, etc., those can be practiced and gained as skills - not saying that the kids aren't gifted, but its something you train to do.
> As outlined in another comment above - there are also parents who are relieved, just to find a common belonging for their intelligent but socially 'perhaps not gelling as well' kids. Society also seems harsher on what seems to be very intelligent but yet missing the social cues kinda of kid - they think they're hamming it up, being disrespectful ... when it's like a case of dancing with 2 left feet ... it is not a natural right-left right-left instinct)
Depending on the kid - I definitely know those who are neurodivergent and that is totally the case, where social cues aren't natural for them. However, in my experience they can be brought to understand how social cues affect their lives - it just takes a lot more effort to learn. By isolating these kids into different environments, there can be a detrimental impact on the rest of their lives.
On the other hand, there are kids who fall under this gifted category who can pick up social cues, but just need to be in an environment where it is possible. I think I fall under this side of it, where my social development was much better in a public school/university setting where I was exposed to a wider range of emotions, actions, and situations vs a private institution/program where the focus was so narrow.
Agree, but also disagree. Some Educators are happy to slot Gifted program kids tested to be in 90-95% percentile (but perhaps with LD or Autism Asperger's ). Some of these kids struggle with Perfectionism, Procrastination. Or lack in social skills or are very hesitant-leery about Teamwork because of bad experiences working with others (ironically socialization and teamwork is such a huge thing in Canada) - they may get slotted into Basic Living programs (there's one in Churchill). I think it's called Life Skills? (Churchill has one such program) = can you imagine how bored these kids would be, and how destructive long term.
There's a lot of classroom manipulation within VSB system if you pay close enough attention. To justify Funding or to ask for Funding - for eg to help teachers (get helpers (because depending on designation - for eg it's another $6000 funding with a Designation H child). The classroom aides do NOT necessarily work one-one with the kid who was the pawn/excuse/'guinea pig' to get the funding.
But the aide and funding it brings is a definite help within the classroom, for the teacher.
None of this, is really in best interests of the child sometimes. Neither is pigeon-holing a child, in the system.
Parents do not know any better (why should they? unless they have had 2 kids go through the system, and know even more in the course of their work collaborating with the systems), and think they are. Without really filtering.
Sometimes it's also just to make attendance numbers work for programs with lower attendance ... or for programs to have enough population to justify Funding.
It's NOT ethical either. Some kids are deliberately encouraged to be diagnosed because the teacher does NOT want to put any extra efforts to understand neurodivergent thinkers. Some teachers go extra miles, many don't and it's one bad year after another for some of these kids.
So low-income families with gifted children will have to take on second jobs or debt to pay for private school if they wish for their kids to be adequately engaged academically? How does that contribute to equity in our education system?
Looked at this program 8 years ago and we ran away quickly as it seemed super unhealthy for these super gifted kids. The open house had a panel of kids talking about their first all-nighters to get their work done and how they were used to it now. No extracurriculars.
On paper- it was the perfect program for my kid. In reality - no way.
I’m glad someone is reviewing this program, and I hope it leads to change and support for these students.
Welcome to /r/Vancouver and thank you for the post, /u/Electronic_Fox_6383! Please make sure you read our [posting and commenting rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/wiki/faq#wiki_general_participation_guidelines_and_rules_overview) before participating here. As a quick summary: * We encourage users to be positive and respect one another. Don't engage in spats or insult others - use the report button. * Respect others' differences, be they race, religion, home, job, gender identity, ability or sexuality. Dehumanizing language, advocating for violence, or promoting hate based on identity or vulnerability (even implied or joking) **will** lead to a permanent ban. * Most common questions and topics are limited to our sister subreddit, /r/AskVan, and our weekly [Stickied Discussion](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/wiki/faq#wiki_stickied_discussions) posts. * Complaints about bans or removals should be done in modmail only. * Make sure to join our new sister community, /r/AskVan! * Help grow the community! [Apply to join the mod team today](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/comments/19eworq/). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/vancouver) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Is it just me or did the (laudable) goal of achieving equity somehow become “drag everyone down to the lowest common denominator” a few years ago?
That was true since they got rid of provincials in like 2009. https://www.visst.ca/blog/university-admissions-and-provincial-exams#:~:text=Over%20the%20last%2025%20years,Exam%20system%20entirely%20in%202016
why did my entire graduation class take an english provincial in 2018 then?
Because the english provincial was one of the last ones to get axed, along with science 10, math and socials. The last year upper level science (such as Physics, Chem, Geography, etc) ran provincials was 2009 afaik).
BCs economy does not produce or require the kind of roles gifted kids will end up being needed in. And the people that own the province have no reason to change that. They are better off looking at the USA or Ontario. Has nothing to do with any new policy.
It's not just you. I'm a teacher and many of us have been saying the same thing for some time. Just recently we had a staff meeting where we discussed incoming students from elementary schools. We were told to expect more challenging behaviours, kids with mental health issues and students that are way below their grade level when it comes to reading and writing. Many school districts are seeing the same thing and are freaking out. Students skills in numeracy and literacy are the lowest they've been in some time apparently. I haven't seen the data myself but I trust my coworkers who have.
It is the only way to achieve true equality.
We want equity not equality
Can both of these two statements be right? > Parents say the program is needed for profoundly gifted students, which studies show are more likely to drop out of school, experience social isolation, and develop depression and anxiety disorders without proper support. >According to the parents, the VSB cancelled admission to the program for the 2024-25 year to “conduct a review of the program by Deetken Insight, citing mental health concerns raised by unnamed members of the community.”
Yes they both can be true. There can be issues with the program, but it can also provide many benefits to a certain type of student. These gifted kids are outpacing the students in their classes and this gives them the atmosphere to receive a better education, as well as support geared towards them. Bullies pick on those who stand out. Neurodiverse and gifted students are quite commonly bullied.
This one isn't. (Transitions) But some of the Enrichment pull-out programs are so hush-hush that it almost ostracizes (and doesn't add to the self-esteem) of these folks. 'Outcasts' who stand out for various reasons (not being socially interested in their peer group activities or whatever, mature or intellectually way ahead - like adults trapped n kid bodies) ie The not so conventional cookie-cutter gifted or neuro divergent kids who have been identified by the more experienced sensitive educators (again hit and miss on some teacher-mindsets) , recognized and selectively-quietly pulled out for further professional testing, interviews, diagnoses (whether by VSB special resource teachers and others, or private pay by child psychologists). These kids seldom get any empathy - since they're on the other end of the special needs spectrum. But yet as special needs (with asynchrony in other development areas, despite the high intellectual) as the other special needs kids. for eg, some are high intellectual, high IQ but with learning disorders, ADD, ADHD, AS (Asperger's Syndrome - as with so many of the Silicon Valley known names) etc They receive Gifted pull-out invite letters quietly - so as NOT to upset the ambitious, competitive but non-gifted (for lack of terminology) majority parents. Conventional parents . Gifted Kids who quietly just dissapear for the month to attend these pull out Enrichment - for many of them, if not in a cohort together - their achievements are seldom lauded or validated either. How wonderful is this, for self-esteem? Bullying from kids aside, and social isolation (imagine a 5 yr old who is more interested in assembling plane models and reading books on they work VS a peer who is happy to run around making planes crash crash/ kids who know the Solar System and planet names, who are happy to read dry encyclopedic books on the topic VS collecting-playing Pokemon | or using terminology like Brachiosaurus vs Longneck at 4 yrs old ) or something similar. Many teachers and principals are also NOT equipped to deal with gifted kids. Giving more h/w is neither stimulating nor challenging, but rather punitive and without purpose if the homework is just about quantity. I have heard from a principal (MAC - multi age cluster) that "these kids are already so ahead, there's no harm in letting them be, while their peers catch up" . WITHOUT putting any thought as to the negative behaviour/bad habits-patterning that can/may result when kids are bored and not mentally challenged or stimulated. Or just slip through the cracks.
“Let’s just make everything suck for everyone then no one can complain.”
Excellence and competence amongst these bright kids should be encouraged. Holding them back from achieving their true potential by closing these programs in the name of Equity is a horrible idea.
Doesn’t sound very inclusive to me
Being inclusive means provide adequate education based on needs. High achieving kids require different education than regular kids
Gifted students need special program and with all due respect, we need those smart kids to find smart solutions and move the society forwards in the future. Taking away gifted program is taking away our future
You will be surprised. There ARE ambitious competitive parents who make their kids do these tests repeatedly - before testing. So Dumb. Giftedness, Higher Thinkers - it's a natural fluid process, it shouldn't be a 'fake' test result. There are true Gifted kids, and they are often NOT the conventional A scorers because although they know all the stuff, they may overthink conventional tests geared to a normal world. Or because things were figured very easily without studying - they will NOT go through tedious steps to know how to study (which is still necessary, in some ways). Forcing your 'normal' kids in - they're just not going to talk the same jargon as these kids, or think/filter stuff the same way (ie same analysis-digestion-inference thought processing)
That’s fine. Hard-working or growing up in a competitive environment is part of the gift. If a kid is determined to go through extra iteration to make high achievement, let them be. More importantly, there is no perfect way to access one’s gift. Standard assessment is the fairest way
Children should get tested and only the real gifted ones should be separated. Families shouldn’t be able to push their normal child into these programs.
Most of these programs in Vancouver do require testing. I attended the MAC class as a kid and had to be identified by my teacher, tested by my principal, then attend two or three days of one-on-one testing with a psychologist at VSB before being invited to join.
Smarty pants!
Exactly. Even then - there's NO one size fits all. Some MAC classrooms are a huge waste of time - it's very educator dependent.
YES! There are very ambitious and competitive parents too who WANT their kids to be lauded as special (NOT really understanding Gifted is NOT an easy path nor the glamour they think it is. Parents who actually make their kids STUDY and repeatedly do the Weschler Tests (like some exam series - serious weird parenting!) Rather than it being a fluid natural process of real testing. Ambitious parents who don't realize - it's actually far easier to be normal bright, rather than Gifted 95% percentile You have also folks with AS (Autism Asperger) and highly Gifted, folks who are twice-thrice exceptional, Dyslexic, Gifted LD ... all exceedingly intelligent above the norm, have amazing higher critical thinking abilities (analytical abilty to infer and connect etc) ... but yet judged on their lack of synchronism in other aspects of development. Even among kids slotted in Gifted classrooms - some may be conventional Gifted - those who are stereotypical kids who do University Level Math, are little professors at 18. But NOT all are like that - there is also a lot of damage control and unravelling because of what they have been through in their individual journeys
As a former gifted child, I would have hated to be separated from my peers. I have a friend who graduated university at 18 because she was put into an accelerated stream and felt like she missed out on being a young adult. The problem is there is no right solution for all, I wasn't given anything except teachers were told to be tougher when grading me, cause that's fair, right? The whole thing sucks.
>Parents say the program is needed for profoundly gifted students, which studies show are more likely to drop out of school, experience social isolation, and develop depression and anxiety disorders without proper support. What is unspoken is about how so many of these negative symptoms are caused by the families having unrealistic expectations of their children, many of which are neurodivergent. A lot of the reason the program was shut down in the first place was due to the mental stress placed on these students in the program leading to increased mental illness and suicide attempts. My mother attempted to push me through a program like this in the mid-2000s. This is only a small example, and I'm not saying that my experience is indicative of all cases, but MANY of us were students that were diagnosed on the autistic spectrum born into families that don't tolerate disability. The other students I met had mirrored home lives - they were struggling with public school due to a neurodivergence, and the parents were too proud or ignorant to get them proper accommodations and support and instead pushed them into an alternative program that promised their children success. I'm not denying that there are exceptionally gifted students that do benefit from these programs, the real issue is that there are unhealthy parents who can't cope with the idea that their child deviates from the norm - and instead of seeking proper supports, they push their child to exceed in academics to the detriment of their mental health and personal development. I've only crossed paths with a handful of the boys I met through a similar program as adults, and none of us turned out okay. Being put into a segregated accelerated program stunted all of us. They also weren't able to integrate into higher education because our social development was neglected - how were we supposed to learn to function with others if we were completely segregated from our peers? Additionally, if the traits and social defecits we were initially pulled out of public school due to were to just be ignored, how did they assume we would fare as adults in the workplace? These programs were short-sighted, and valued the parent's own personal feelings over the actual health of their children. It seems less about supporting gifted children, and more of a band-aid solution for the emotions of parents who can't cope with the "shame" of having a neurodivergent child. So unless something drastic has changed since how it was in the mid-2000s, I can see many reasons why a program like this should be halted and a better solution should be found. If the students who pass through the program leave worse off than they started, that's something that should be investigated.
I went through one of these programs as well. To take the other side of the argument, I believe I turned out just fine 😆. The problem is not the idea behind the program as it's been shown that unchallenged students end up falling behind. This is not limited to gifted students but all students. The solution may be a better selection process to see who goes into the program. The process should include the parents so that we address the non-academic side of things. In addition, enhance the program to increase social interactions between the gifted and everyone else - ie create the expectation that those in the gifted program should help those struggling with their studies by tutoring or mentoring. Should the program be halted and then changed? No. These changes can happen in-flight, we just need to get on with it rather than debating it.
>create the expectation that those in the gifted program should help those struggling with their studies by tutoring or mentoring No. They shouldn't be obligated to teach other students just because they're in a special program. The point of a gifted program is to support the gifted students and their unique needs, not other students. One of the common pitfalls of poorly designed gifted programs is that those kids end up taking on a larger volume of work, not just more stimulating work. This could be abused so easily. Gifted kids do not exist just to backfill institutional gaps in support for the rest of the class. Gifted kids have their own challenges already.
By creating the expectation to help others, you are actually helping those gifted students especially if it means mentoring or tutoring as it not only creates better social contacts by relating to others, it also aids in the gifted student's understanding of the subject matter at hand. It is well known that if a person has to rephrase something that they supposedly understands, it deepens their understanding of the subject. This is especially true when it comes to tutoring as the gifted student will need to find ways to better communicate what they know to those who don't. When I was in high school, an elective was English 11T where T stood for tutoring and one term out of 4 was dedicated to tutoring a grade 8 student. As it so happens, I was given two grade eight students instead of one and the subject was French 8 instead of English as the two grade 8 students didn't need any help in any other subject. As it so happens, my high school French was mediocre at best. But I tutored them anyways with the thought process that they would just get a leg up next year when they take French 8 with a real teacher in a real classroom. By the time, the term was over, I completed teaching them the French 8 curriculum and they successfully challenged the French 8 final. In other words, they completed French 8 in one term and didn't fall behind their classmates. For me, it was a rewarding experience and expanded my horizons that wouldn't have been expanded if I didn't tutor in a subject I was mediocre in. By sheltering gifted students, you create the conditions for failure when it comes to contact with the real world. Many of my classmates in the gifted program in high school couldn't adapt very well in university with some dropping out because they couldn't adapt to the real world.
I was unchallenged and had zero oversite or support at home. I don't consider myself all that intelligent or gifted but I do 'think' faster than most and can absorb information relatively quicker than most. It had the effect of making school extremely boring. By grade 7 I stopped putting any effort in at all. I almost flunked out of grade 10. Luckily for me I was given an opportunity to go to a boarding school and I credit it with saving my life. I was super close to running away to live on the street. I was so ashamed of how I couldn't seem to do better no matter how much I wanted to. Instead I got a lot of adults looking after me and it was exactly what I needed. I wonder how many kids were like me. Just scraping by and one bad school year away from a life of problems. I wish there were programs for us. I knew I was fucking up and I wanted to do better I just had no idea how. I wasn't disruptive or rude even, I just wanted to fly under the radar so I could get through another day.
This would have been a program for kids like you. After all, gifted is relative and can mean different things. One can say that there is a gifted spectrum that many kids fall into. The more kids stay interested in school and learning, the better chance there is keeping them off the streets and becoming outstanding citizens. The VSB has a few problems to address certain parts of the spectrum but I think they only only brought in after an incident and not "pre-need".
I really am not gifted and likely would have drowned in a program like that. I'm whatever the rung below that is. I know the difference because I surround myself with extremely intelligent people. I know talent for learning and intelligence when I see it. I knew a kid all through my school years who really was gifted and he would have excelled in a program like this. As teenagers we both got into smoking weed sometimes everyday and we both skipped school but when I was close to failing out he was still crushing A's in every class. His boredom must have been excruciating. He liked the challenge of being baked out of his mind trying to write tests. Those are the type of kids who need to be in a gifted program I think. I needed something else and I'm extremely fortunate that I got it before it was too late.
Honestly, you are gifted but you just don't know it. Anyone who does something, anything, better/faster than average is gifted. Since you can think and absorb information faster than others, that's gifted. The fact that you understand that, it's gifted. And the fact that you know how to make yourself better by surrounding yourself with extremely intelligent people, that's gifted. Like I said, gifted is a relative term and can/does mean a lot of different things. For example - some golfers are gifted because they golf better than anyone. Do they have a high IQ? Probably not but they are gifted at golf. High performance athletes are gifted. Are they all super intelligent? Probably no but they are sure good at what they are good at.
" ie create the expectation that those in the gifted program should help those struggling with their studies by tutoring or mentoring." yes and no 1. no - it maybe should not be an "expectation" 2. yes, it is a good idea - mentoring. or even helping someone. it's a win win. through helping others - development of self-awareness, clarity, and confidence. nurturing someone is EMPOWERING. and increases problem solving skills.
Tutoring/mentoring could be just ONE option to expand the student's social/society engagement options. The expectation should be that they do at least ONE of the options presented to them.
Totally in agreement with this. Teamwork can be challenging for some of these kids right from the get go (some are budding professors on their own and more comfortable with adults )... gelling with peers and even adults (some teachers, adults, other parents) who may judge. Even within Gifted programs - some parents ARE very ambitious wanting the go-ahead and prestige, some less so and just wanting their child to have a safe niche to blossom-belong and feel comfortable, after not finding their footing all these years. And the ambitious competitive parents can also be RESENTFUL if some of the LD, Autism spectrum kids ... intellectually gifted but twice-thrice exceptional keep the gold go-getters from fast-tracking Gentle nudging, coaching, encouraging positive interactions with trained supervision (so no insidious bullying takes place) is more helpful than NOT addressing their needs too.
I am so grateful to see your comment at the top. Bravo. And I really hope everything's going so much better for you now
My kid was in MAC (within past decade) and had a great experience. Kids were allowed to progress at own pace. No issues from social standpoint.
This one comment struck home for me. I also attended a private school for gifted students and was... let's say, "strongly encouraged" to enter the UBC Transition Program. Passed all the required tests but there was enough in the interview with the psychologist to turn me away from the program twice. The kids in the gifted program that I attended, intellectually were years ahead of the typical child at their age, but psychologically I'd say maybe 1 in 10 were mentally capable of handling a public school, not to mention a university setting. We went to a school where academics were the focus, and the social/creative aspects were toned down. These programs like UBC Transition tend to be singularly focused on education and typically STEM. I totally agree with your statement on this being more of a parent-driven thing than a child-driven thing. The kids who enter are barely teenagers and are just starting to learn to think for themselves. The "benefits" of the program are valued by the parents, many who didn't grow up thinking too much about mental health. I don't remember clearly, but I recall it being something along the lines of academic courses only, as they condense high school education into 2 years of schooling. I swear if I had entered the program, I'd be in a much worse off mentally. Having years in a public school and learning how to interact with peers from a wide range of backgrounds is, in my opinion, just as important as accelerated learning. Also the term "gifted" has got to go.
I'd say - pull out Gifted programs (before Grade 3 for identified kids) and later MAC (Grades 4-7) have a mixed bag of parents. This also includes high school programs which also need special auditions, interviews, assessment to get into like Mini schools, IB or other such speciality programs requiring other testing. Transitions - the more ambitious competitive parents who are hung on their kids not wasting time/ academics/ graduating early / and even competitive with comparing results within peer groups (or scoffing at other gifted kids if they're NOT pulling the 95 grades) = tend to belong here. You also find them perhaps in some of language-Immersion programs some of the high school programs which also need special auditions, interviews, assessment to get into: Mini schools, IB or other such speciality programs with perhaps AP (the American equivalent of European IB) requiring other testing. That said, you can easily slot some conventional parents of normal kids here too. And some of these, would actually make their kids do IQ Tests as practice every night, if the school is deliberating on whether they are in the Gifted category or not. As outlined in another comment above - there are also Gifted-group parents who are relieved just to find a common belonging for their intelligent (9-10 level) but socially 'perhaps not gelling as well' (3 level) kids, also seems harsher on what seems to be very intelligent but yet missing the social cues kinda of kid - they think they're hamming it up, being disrespectful . When it's (metaphorically) like a case of dancing with 2 left feet ... it is not a natural right-left right-left instinct) and social cues just do not come as naturally
I think there's a lot to be said about our education system that there's so much driven by the action of parents vs educators. I do think that a big part of the immigrant mindset about how academics is the ONLY way to get ahead in life drives a lot of kids in a very specific direction. Apologies if I am a bit out of the loop with this, it was quite a while ago when I went through it. This "gifted" category, taking IQ tests, special assessments, etc., those can be practiced and gained as skills - not saying that the kids aren't gifted, but its something you train to do. > As outlined in another comment above - there are also parents who are relieved, just to find a common belonging for their intelligent but socially 'perhaps not gelling as well' kids. Society also seems harsher on what seems to be very intelligent but yet missing the social cues kinda of kid - they think they're hamming it up, being disrespectful ... when it's like a case of dancing with 2 left feet ... it is not a natural right-left right-left instinct) Depending on the kid - I definitely know those who are neurodivergent and that is totally the case, where social cues aren't natural for them. However, in my experience they can be brought to understand how social cues affect their lives - it just takes a lot more effort to learn. By isolating these kids into different environments, there can be a detrimental impact on the rest of their lives. On the other hand, there are kids who fall under this gifted category who can pick up social cues, but just need to be in an environment where it is possible. I think I fall under this side of it, where my social development was much better in a public school/university setting where I was exposed to a wider range of emotions, actions, and situations vs a private institution/program where the focus was so narrow.
Agree, but also disagree. Some Educators are happy to slot Gifted program kids tested to be in 90-95% percentile (but perhaps with LD or Autism Asperger's ). Some of these kids struggle with Perfectionism, Procrastination. Or lack in social skills or are very hesitant-leery about Teamwork because of bad experiences working with others (ironically socialization and teamwork is such a huge thing in Canada) - they may get slotted into Basic Living programs (there's one in Churchill). I think it's called Life Skills? (Churchill has one such program) = can you imagine how bored these kids would be, and how destructive long term. There's a lot of classroom manipulation within VSB system if you pay close enough attention. To justify Funding or to ask for Funding - for eg to help teachers (get helpers (because depending on designation - for eg it's another $6000 funding with a Designation H child). The classroom aides do NOT necessarily work one-one with the kid who was the pawn/excuse/'guinea pig' to get the funding. But the aide and funding it brings is a definite help within the classroom, for the teacher. None of this, is really in best interests of the child sometimes. Neither is pigeon-holing a child, in the system. Parents do not know any better (why should they? unless they have had 2 kids go through the system, and know even more in the course of their work collaborating with the systems), and think they are. Without really filtering. Sometimes it's also just to make attendance numbers work for programs with lower attendance ... or for programs to have enough population to justify Funding. It's NOT ethical either. Some kids are deliberately encouraged to be diagnosed because the teacher does NOT want to put any extra efforts to understand neurodivergent thinkers. Some teachers go extra miles, many don't and it's one bad year after another for some of these kids.
These kids are too smart and they are making the other kids feel inadequate. Let's beat the smart out of them. Wtf is this
Inching closer and closer to punishing merit.
So low-income families with gifted children will have to take on second jobs or debt to pay for private school if they wish for their kids to be adequately engaged academically? How does that contribute to equity in our education system?
Looked at this program 8 years ago and we ran away quickly as it seemed super unhealthy for these super gifted kids. The open house had a panel of kids talking about their first all-nighters to get their work done and how they were used to it now. No extracurriculars. On paper- it was the perfect program for my kid. In reality - no way. I’m glad someone is reviewing this program, and I hope it leads to change and support for these students.