6 thoughts on “Letters to the Editor: The Prodigy Puzzle”

1. For those who may not have a child at Thoreau, Barbara Yost Williams, the second letter writer, is a teacher there and very much loved by people whose opinion I respect.
   That said, however, I found her letter to the NYTimes troubling. It echoed an attitude we experienced many times over the years from MMSD teachers and administrators as we tried to get appropriate programming for our gifted child, who, by the way, meets the criterion for prodigy as defined in the original NYTimes magazine cover story. And the attitude we ran into time and again was that we were pushy parents.
   Indeed, the reason we had our son tested in the first place when he was seven was as a reality-check for ourselves after his teacher told us she didn’t have to teach him calculus, something we never suggested she do, and that he wasn’t as smart as we thought he was. Turns out she was terribly wrong. Not surprisingly, she was a pretty lousy teacher in general. But worse, she and others after her made us feel awful everytime we raised concerns, asked for help or offered suggestions.
   So when I read an MMSD teacher published in the NYTimes for the proposition that her “most genuinely innovative thinkers” have hands-off parents who presumably stay out of her way to let her run her classroom as she likes, I hear all the voices of those teachers and staff who really didn’t want to be bothered adjusting what they did, who in fact were mighty annoyed by what they saw as our “interference”, sending that message loud and clear not only to us but to our children.
   I wish some teachers understood that often parents know their children better. We live daily with the child’s boredom and frustration in a classroom indifferent to their needs. Some kids deal better with boredom than others, but I’m here to tell you that with gifted kids they either complain or tune out; I’ll take complaint anyday. It’s for those kids still invested enough to complain/ask for help that parents will approach a teacher for assistance, even when they know it won’t make them or their child well-liked—the alternative is worse, to watch your child shrivel and buy-out.
   It might help if teachers understood that it’s not misplaced pride but rather an effort to make the hours at school a time of learning– joyful learning would be great, but we would even settle for some challenge beyond sitting in a hallway doing next year’s worksheets.
   And I would take the knocks all over again if I had to for our children. I just wish it didn’t have to be that way.
   One last point: given the trend for extending heterogeneous programming deep into high school at West, I’m very relieved our children have graduated.

2. It is a sad situation indeed when a parent has to witness a child’s boredom and indifference to school, particularly when the school seems unresponsive to the child’s particular needs. That said, however, it seems Ms. Knoebel took my words and created from them something new. Or perhaps she needed a point of departure from which to express her own valid concerns.
   I welcome parents help in my classroom. The feedback I recieve which I most value comes from my students and their parents–it is their feedback that most stongly informs the way I teach. It is true too that I see a difference between parents who are supportive of and parents who are ambitious for their children. Some of my students who I believe to be extremely perceptive do happen to come from families who haven’t the time or resources to advocate for them. One of the most truly gifted students I have had in recent years came from a family who were anxious that he mentor children in our classroom who had less sophisticated skills than he. This child’s parents were as concerned with encouraging their child’s social conscience as they were interested in accelerating his critical thinking skills. We found a balance that seemed to work well for the classroom community and for the child. I think in part because of this approach to the child’s giftedness, he was both interested in the communication of ideas to others and eager to pursue and express his interests. As with so many of the families I have had the privilege to work with, they taught me a lot.
   I wonder if we too often think of talented and gifted kids as those with sophisticated skills rather than those with genuine intellectual curiosity. There is a significant distinction between the two, though it is best when schools can find ways to promote both, one informing-supporting the other. This is something I try to work toward…and it is indeed work in progress.

3. Perhaps one of the biggest issues is that, if I understand correctly, our School of Education and others around the country offer no real training programs for people who want to specialize in meeting the needs of talented/gifted children through differentiation, pull-out, or ability grouping. This seems to create a disconnect between parents, who see their child’s abilities and reaction to school, and teachers who may be dealing with a pushy parent or a truly gifted student.
   I found a fabulous educational psychologist in Madison (Cathy Propper) when I had my son tested. I kept hearing that he was no different from the other students, he really couldn’t do math, and that the really smart kids liked to write and he did not. By the end of a year, I had to know whether I was delusional or he really was what I thought he was.
   Turns out that he was indeed quite different from the other students according to numerous tests and measures (it’s been 10 years, so my memory slips a bit). He tested out at the 99th percentile in math, and 95 and above in everything except language where he was average. So….
   — he could do math, he just didn’t want to count little colored objects when he could do three-column addition at the age of 3
   — he didn’t like to write because his dexterity and his spelling skills didn’t match his spelling vocabulary or the speed at which he could write.
   — he also didn’t like to write because he has always been a child of few words crafted into concise, tight, sentences. His 1 and 2 grade teacher gave him a rough time because he didn’t write “enough” and certainly didn’t write as much as the bright kids (in her estimation).
   To be honest, I didn’t care whether his needs were met inside or outside of the classroom as long as he was happy and eager to go to school. That was not the case and he became more and more withdrawn.
   We were blessed to have Kerry Berns as an in-school TAG teacher at that time. She later was pulled out to deal with multi-schools and then pulled out of multi-schools to be downtown. Her direct work with my son, and her creation of a very helpful parents group focused on information, advocacy skills, and problem solving, helped us to survive as long as we did.
   I know that there are very gifted teachers who are able to achieve truly successful heterogenous classrooms, but in my experience their insights and strategies are not used to full benefit by other teachers or the district.
   That leaves a large number of classes where the children who are indeed different from the rest of the kids, spend their days waiting – in vain – for someone to see who they are and connect with their interests and abilities. That is a simply awful situation for child and parent.

4. The following email — which I received and was asked to post anonymously — speaks to the issue … as well as to the experience of academically talented students in the heterogeneous classroom:
   Applying for a summer program, my son (a junior at West) was asked to answer the question “What is the most difficult or frustrating learning experience you have had, and why?” This is what he wrote:
   “The most difficult learning experience I encounter almost every day in school. I learn very quickly, but that can be a large problem in a school where there is most times only one speed of class. After I fully understand the material, most of the time I have to twiddle my thumbs for a while until everyone understands. This makes it very difficult for me to learn much because after I haven’t needed to pay attention for a day or two, I sometimes miss the point where I need to start (paying attention) again, thus losing possible knowledge. In many classes, this isn’t a problem, but in classes in which I enjoy the topic … I would really like to learn more in the topic and this really hinders my chances to do so.”
   And I bet there are kids at the other end of the learning spectrum who are similarly frustrated in “one-speed” classes.

5. My original comment, posted months ago now, was not intended as a rap on Ms Yost whom I’ve never met and about whom I’ve heard wonderful reports. And I can imagine NYTimes editing might have altered the precise meaning of her letter.
   However, her response still puzzles me. I appreciate the distinction she draws between testing high and genuinely creative thinking. My children demonstrated and continue to demonstrate remarkable skills by either measure. And yet we had to push the boulder uphill nearly every year in MMSD (with some notable exceptions.)
   I further appreciate the difficult task we ask of teachers to differentiate in a classroom across students of disparate abilities. I think even extraodinarily talented and trained teachers will find limited success. It is why I cannot agree with the trend towards heterogeneous groupings in the high school years. With every year in school, some students lag further and further behind while others are ready for much more than a uniform curriculum.
   In closing, please accept my apology, Ms Yost, if you felt my original comments were aimed at you. They weren’t. But I’m also tired of the pushy parent label—behind them often stands a frustrated, gifted AND creative kid.

6. One other comment. When I re-read the thread, I picked up a piece that I had missed before, and that has to do with the benefits to TAG kids who have opportunities to work with kids who are average or who are struggling in class. This point has been presented in arguments for heterogeneous grouping, and really should be given a full discussion.
   This line of argument presumes that highly advanced kids are kept in some sort of social bubble by overly zealous parents. Nothing could be farther from the truth – at least in our case.
   Our son met and interacted with a broad range of people through sports teams, daycare and after school daycare as a younger child and through cheerleading (East had the most diverse competition squad at nationals two years ago), video games, and life at East High school.
   He also has had a rich span of influences through our immediate family. Indeed, the greatest influence in his life is not me, but his older brother who has struggled with dyslexia; at the age of 4 he informed me that he was turning brown like his brother but I just couldn’t see it. Through his brother, he has a close circle of friends that span the racial/ethnic and interest/ability spectrum. My son also has spent considerable time with an older cousin who has Down’s syndrome and with my foster niece and nephew.
   In short, there is no protective bubble for him. It disturbs me greatly to imagine that he somehow is better off or getting something that is lacking in his life by being forced into a classroom that cannot recognize who HE is as a diverse member of the school community.

Comments are closed.