Seminar Program in SD school district

[KSMountain]

[quote=flu]I’m sorry, but can someone help me understand the intense interest in GATE programs?

What do you learn in gate versus non-gate versus what you could learn just by sending your kid to an enrichment program or two…[/quote]

Flu,

Well, this will be a bit of a personal post, but hopefully I can keep from going too far into the weeds:

I was in cluster, in San Diego, throughout the 70’s. There *was* a difference in the education at that time. Was it an unambiguous win? Is it the same now? I don’t know. Here are some anecdotes:

In 5th grade, the cluster kids had a different reading textbook. It was more advanced and much more interesting. The other kids didn’t seem to even notice the bifurcation.

I recall in 8th grade an exercise in a cluster U.S. history class. It was a game with special materials and we were simulating running a naval blockade of the u.s. coast during the civil war. Different groups of students played different roles with different objectives. It was complicated and fun. I dont think this kind of exercise was going on in the other classes.

I recall a class where literally the entire SDUSD film catalog was handed to me and I could order any film or “filmstrip” that interested me, and it would be delivered in a few days and I could watch it. I don’t recall what the rules were about how often I could do this, but it may have been as much as a day a week. I benefited from that I think.

I was in one class where it was a combination of only cluster and seminar folks (we used those same exact terms back then, but quietly, (which is a bit of a weird position to put a kid in, btw)). Anyway, what I recall about this class was it was filled with multiple rotating racks of paperback books, and you could read any of them on class time. Which was cool, I guess, but is that really better than something more structured? I recall I read “Sybil” and “The boy who could make himself disappear” at that time, neither of which are especially cheery stories.

It was also there that I started to observe and form the opinion that the seminar folks were spending too much time with each other. They were the same group of 15 or so segregated into their own classes for say 4 out of 6 classes. So they really weren’t exposed to simply the quantity (let alone the diversity) of the full student body – and it showed.

I had a friend in seminar who told me they had explored, for like a week (with the teacher as facilitator), how our junior high school might go about seceding from the U.S. I thought that was pretty cool at the time. Now I’m not so sure that was a good use of a week, but perhaps it could be, depending on the teacher.

So my biased summary of all this might be:
cluster – probably good.
seminar – the kids are definitely smart but maybe not so good for socialization.

As a parent, I think you’d want to evaluate whether you thought the increased academic opportunities warranted the narrowed socialization. Maybe you combine it with enforced sports say to keep some balance. You’d also want to (try to) be comfortable your kid could handle less structure. I saw boys and girls both get into trouble.

I have plenty more to say on this topic – anyone interested in 30 yr old info/perspective feel free to pm me.

[Coronita]

[quote=KSMountain][quote=flu]I’m sorry, but can someone help me understand the intense interest in GATE programs?

What do you learn in gate versus non-gate versus what you could learn just by sending your kid to an enrichment program or two…[/quote]

Flu,

Well, this will be a bit of a personal post, but hopefully I can keep from going too far into the weeds:

I was in cluster, in San Diego, throughout the 70’s. There *was* a difference in the education at that time. Was it an unambiguous win? Is it the same now? I don’t know. Here are some anecdotes:

In 5th grade, the cluster kids had a different reading textbook. It was more advanced and much more interesting. The other kids didn’t seem to even notice the bifurcation.

I recall in 8th grade an exercise in a cluster U.S. history class. It was a game with special materials and we were simulating running a naval blockade of the u.s. coast during the civil war. Different groups of students played different roles with different objectives. It was complicated and fun. I dont think this kind of exercise was going on in the other classes.

I recall a class where literally the entire SDUSD film catalog was handed to me and I could order any film or “filmstrip” that interested me, and it would be delivered in a few days and I could watch it. I don’t recall what the rules were about how often I could do this, but it may have been as much as a day a week. I benefited from that I think.

I was in one class where it was a combination of only cluster and seminar folks (we used those same exact terms back then, but quietly, (which is a bit of a weird position to put a kid in, btw)). Anyway, what I recall about this class was it was filled with multiple rotating racks of paperback books, and you could read any of them on class time. Which was cool, I guess, but is that really better than something more structured? I recall I read “Sybil” and “The boy who could make himself disappear” at that time, neither of which are especially cheery stories.

It was also there that I started to observe and form the opinion that the seminar folks were spending too much time with each other. They were the same group of 15 or so segregated into their own classes for say 4 out of 6 classes. So they really weren’t exposed to simply the quantity (let alone the diversity) of the full student body – and it showed.

I had a friend in seminar who told me they had explored, for like a week (with the teacher as facilitator), how our junior high school might go about seceding from the U.S. I thought that was pretty cool at the time. Now I’m not so sure that was a good use of a week, but perhaps it could be, depending on the teacher.

So my biased summary of all this might be:
cluster – probably good.
seminar – the kids are definitely smart but maybe not so good for socialization.

As a parent, I think you’d want to evaluate whether you thought the increased academic opportunities warranted the narrowed socialization. Maybe you combine it with enforced sports say to keep some balance. You’d also want to (try to) be comfortable your kid could handle less structure. I saw boys and girls both get into trouble.

I have plenty more to say on this topic – anyone interested in 30 yr old info/perspective feel free to pm me.[/quote]

I see. My next question would be why do such programs exist only to kids that some think are gifted and why the not so gifted are left behind. I see nothing here that a non gifted kid couldnt be smart enough to do the same. Why the exclusivity in a publicly funded school, especially at such a young age, when really you can’t tell how a kid will turn out

Seems to me a misappropriation of public funds to breed elitism at such an early age when there really isn’t a basis or meaningful measurement being so young

I don’t know, but I think every parent think their kids are gifted, so I guess what the hell is the point of exclusivity

[Coronita]

[quote=KSMountain][quote=flu]I’m sorry, but can someone help me understand the intense interest in GATE programs?

What do you learn in gate versus non-gate versus what you could learn just by sending your kid to an enrichment program or two…[/quote]

Flu,

Well, this will be a bit of a personal post, but hopefully I can keep from going too far into the weeds:

I was in cluster, in San Diego, throughout the 70’s. There *was* a difference in the education at that time. Was it an unambiguous win? Is it the same now? I don’t know. Here are some anecdotes:

In 5th grade, the cluster kids had a different reading textbook. It was more advanced and much more interesting. The other kids didn’t seem to even notice the bifurcation.

I recall in 8th grade an exercise in a cluster U.S. history class. It was a game with special materials and we were simulating running a naval blockade of the u.s. coast during the civil war. Different groups of students played different roles with different objectives. It was complicated and fun. I dont think this kind of exercise was going on in the other classes.

I recall a class where literally the entire SDUSD film catalog was handed to me and I could order any film or “filmstrip” that interested me, and it would be delivered in a few days and I could watch it. I don’t recall what the rules were about how often I could do this, but it may have been as much as a day a week. I benefited from that I think.

I was in one class where it was a combination of only cluster and seminar folks (we used those same exact terms back then, but quietly, (which is a bit of a weird position to put a kid in, btw)). Anyway, what I recall about this class was it was filled with multiple rotating racks of paperback books, and you could read any of them on class time. Which was cool, I guess, but is that really better than something more structured? I recall I read “Sybil” and “The boy who could make himself disappear” at that time, neither of which are especially cheery stories.

It was also there that I started to observe and form the opinion that the seminar folks were spending too much time with each other. They were the same group of 15 or so segregated into their own classes for say 4 out of 6 classes. So they really weren’t exposed to simply the quantity (let alone the diversity) of the full student body – and it showed.

I had a friend in seminar who told me they had explored, for like a week (with the teacher as facilitator), how our junior high school might go about seceding from the U.S. I thought that was pretty cool at the time. Now I’m not so sure that was a good use of a week, but perhaps it could be, depending on the teacher.

So my biased summary of all this might be:
cluster – probably good.
seminar – the kids are definitely smart but maybe not so good for socialization.

As a parent, I think you’d want to evaluate whether you thought the increased academic opportunities warranted the narrowed socialization. Maybe you combine it with enforced sports say to keep some balance. You’d also want to (try to) be comfortable your kid could handle less structure. I saw boys and girls both get into trouble.

I have plenty more to say on this topic – anyone interested in 30 yr old info/perspective feel free to pm me.[/quote]

I see. My next question would be why do such programs exist only to kids that some think are gifted and why the not so gifted are left behind. I see nothing here that a non gifted kid couldnt be smart enough to do the same. Why the exclusivity in a publicly funded school, especially at such a young age, when really you can’t tell how a kid will turn out

Seems to me a misappropriation of public funds to breed elitism at such an early age when there really isn’t a basis or meaningful measurement being so young

I don’t know, but I think every parent think their kids are gifted, so I guess what the hell is the point of exclusivity

[Coronita]

[quote=KSMountain][quote=flu]I’m sorry, but can someone help me understand the intense interest in GATE programs?

What do you learn in gate versus non-gate versus what you could learn just by sending your kid to an enrichment program or two…[/quote]

Flu,

Well, this will be a bit of a personal post, but hopefully I can keep from going too far into the weeds:

I was in cluster, in San Diego, throughout the 70’s. There *was* a difference in the education at that time. Was it an unambiguous win? Is it the same now? I don’t know. Here are some anecdotes:

In 5th grade, the cluster kids had a different reading textbook. It was more advanced and much more interesting. The other kids didn’t seem to even notice the bifurcation.

I recall in 8th grade an exercise in a cluster U.S. history class. It was a game with special materials and we were simulating running a naval blockade of the u.s. coast during the civil war. Different groups of students played different roles with different objectives. It was complicated and fun. I dont think this kind of exercise was going on in the other classes.

I recall a class where literally the entire SDUSD film catalog was handed to me and I could order any film or “filmstrip” that interested me, and it would be delivered in a few days and I could watch it. I don’t recall what the rules were about how often I could do this, but it may have been as much as a day a week. I benefited from that I think.

I was in one class where it was a combination of only cluster and seminar folks (we used those same exact terms back then, but quietly, (which is a bit of a weird position to put a kid in, btw)). Anyway, what I recall about this class was it was filled with multiple rotating racks of paperback books, and you could read any of them on class time. Which was cool, I guess, but is that really better than something more structured? I recall I read “Sybil” and “The boy who could make himself disappear” at that time, neither of which are especially cheery stories.

It was also there that I started to observe and form the opinion that the seminar folks were spending too much time with each other. They were the same group of 15 or so segregated into their own classes for say 4 out of 6 classes. So they really weren’t exposed to simply the quantity (let alone the diversity) of the full student body – and it showed.

I had a friend in seminar who told me they had explored, for like a week (with the teacher as facilitator), how our junior high school might go about seceding from the U.S. I thought that was pretty cool at the time. Now I’m not so sure that was a good use of a week, but perhaps it could be, depending on the teacher.

So my biased summary of all this might be:
cluster – probably good.
seminar – the kids are definitely smart but maybe not so good for socialization.

As a parent, I think you’d want to evaluate whether you thought the increased academic opportunities warranted the narrowed socialization. Maybe you combine it with enforced sports say to keep some balance. You’d also want to (try to) be comfortable your kid could handle less structure. I saw boys and girls both get into trouble.

I have plenty more to say on this topic – anyone interested in 30 yr old info/perspective feel free to pm me.[/quote]

I see. My next question would be why do such programs exist only to kids that some think are gifted and why the not so gifted are left behind. I see nothing here that a non gifted kid couldnt be smart enough to do the same. Why the exclusivity in a publicly funded school, especially at such a young age, when really you can’t tell how a kid will turn out

Seems to me a misappropriation of public funds to breed elitism at such an early age when there really isn’t a basis or meaningful measurement being so young

I don’t know, but I think every parent think their kids are gifted, so I guess what the hell is the point of exclusivity

[Coronita]

[quote=KSMountain][quote=flu]I’m sorry, but can someone help me understand the intense interest in GATE programs?

What do you learn in gate versus non-gate versus what you could learn just by sending your kid to an enrichment program or two…[/quote]

Flu,

Well, this will be a bit of a personal post, but hopefully I can keep from going too far into the weeds:

I was in cluster, in San Diego, throughout the 70’s. There *was* a difference in the education at that time. Was it an unambiguous win? Is it the same now? I don’t know. Here are some anecdotes:

In 5th grade, the cluster kids had a different reading textbook. It was more advanced and much more interesting. The other kids didn’t seem to even notice the bifurcation.

I recall in 8th grade an exercise in a cluster U.S. history class. It was a game with special materials and we were simulating running a naval blockade of the u.s. coast during the civil war. Different groups of students played different roles with different objectives. It was complicated and fun. I dont think this kind of exercise was going on in the other classes.

I recall a class where literally the entire SDUSD film catalog was handed to me and I could order any film or “filmstrip” that interested me, and it would be delivered in a few days and I could watch it. I don’t recall what the rules were about how often I could do this, but it may have been as much as a day a week. I benefited from that I think.

I was in one class where it was a combination of only cluster and seminar folks (we used those same exact terms back then, but quietly, (which is a bit of a weird position to put a kid in, btw)). Anyway, what I recall about this class was it was filled with multiple rotating racks of paperback books, and you could read any of them on class time. Which was cool, I guess, but is that really better than something more structured? I recall I read “Sybil” and “The boy who could make himself disappear” at that time, neither of which are especially cheery stories.

It was also there that I started to observe and form the opinion that the seminar folks were spending too much time with each other. They were the same group of 15 or so segregated into their own classes for say 4 out of 6 classes. So they really weren’t exposed to simply the quantity (let alone the diversity) of the full student body – and it showed.

I had a friend in seminar who told me they had explored, for like a week (with the teacher as facilitator), how our junior high school might go about seceding from the U.S. I thought that was pretty cool at the time. Now I’m not so sure that was a good use of a week, but perhaps it could be, depending on the teacher.

So my biased summary of all this might be:
cluster – probably good.
seminar – the kids are definitely smart but maybe not so good for socialization.

As a parent, I think you’d want to evaluate whether you thought the increased academic opportunities warranted the narrowed socialization. Maybe you combine it with enforced sports say to keep some balance. You’d also want to (try to) be comfortable your kid could handle less structure. I saw boys and girls both get into trouble.

I have plenty more to say on this topic – anyone interested in 30 yr old info/perspective feel free to pm me.[/quote]

I see. My next question would be why do such programs exist only to kids that some think are gifted and why the not so gifted are left behind. I see nothing here that a non gifted kid couldnt be smart enough to do the same. Why the exclusivity in a publicly funded school, especially at such a young age, when really you can’t tell how a kid will turn out

Seems to me a misappropriation of public funds to breed elitism at such an early age when there really isn’t a basis or meaningful measurement being so young

I don’t know, but I think every parent think their kids are gifted, so I guess what the hell is the point of exclusivity

[Coronita]

[quote=KSMountain][quote=flu]I’m sorry, but can someone help me understand the intense interest in GATE programs?

What do you learn in gate versus non-gate versus what you could learn just by sending your kid to an enrichment program or two…[/quote]

Flu,

Well, this will be a bit of a personal post, but hopefully I can keep from going too far into the weeds:

I was in cluster, in San Diego, throughout the 70’s. There *was* a difference in the education at that time. Was it an unambiguous win? Is it the same now? I don’t know. Here are some anecdotes:

In 5th grade, the cluster kids had a different reading textbook. It was more advanced and much more interesting. The other kids didn’t seem to even notice the bifurcation.

I recall in 8th grade an exercise in a cluster U.S. history class. It was a game with special materials and we were simulating running a naval blockade of the u.s. coast during the civil war. Different groups of students played different roles with different objectives. It was complicated and fun. I dont think this kind of exercise was going on in the other classes.

I recall a class where literally the entire SDUSD film catalog was handed to me and I could order any film or “filmstrip” that interested me, and it would be delivered in a few days and I could watch it. I don’t recall what the rules were about how often I could do this, but it may have been as much as a day a week. I benefited from that I think.

I was in one class where it was a combination of only cluster and seminar folks (we used those same exact terms back then, but quietly, (which is a bit of a weird position to put a kid in, btw)). Anyway, what I recall about this class was it was filled with multiple rotating racks of paperback books, and you could read any of them on class time. Which was cool, I guess, but is that really better than something more structured? I recall I read “Sybil” and “The boy who could make himself disappear” at that time, neither of which are especially cheery stories.

It was also there that I started to observe and form the opinion that the seminar folks were spending too much time with each other. They were the same group of 15 or so segregated into their own classes for say 4 out of 6 classes. So they really weren’t exposed to simply the quantity (let alone the diversity) of the full student body – and it showed.

I had a friend in seminar who told me they had explored, for like a week (with the teacher as facilitator), how our junior high school might go about seceding from the U.S. I thought that was pretty cool at the time. Now I’m not so sure that was a good use of a week, but perhaps it could be, depending on the teacher.

So my biased summary of all this might be:
cluster – probably good.
seminar – the kids are definitely smart but maybe not so good for socialization.

As a parent, I think you’d want to evaluate whether you thought the increased academic opportunities warranted the narrowed socialization. Maybe you combine it with enforced sports say to keep some balance. You’d also want to (try to) be comfortable your kid could handle less structure. I saw boys and girls both get into trouble.

I have plenty more to say on this topic – anyone interested in 30 yr old info/perspective feel free to pm me.[/quote]

I see. My next question would be why do such programs exist only to kids that some think are gifted and why the not so gifted are left behind. I see nothing here that a non gifted kid couldnt be smart enough to do the same. Why the exclusivity in a publicly funded school, especially at such a young age, when really you can’t tell how a kid will turn out

Seems to me a misappropriation of public funds to breed elitism at such an early age when there really isn’t a basis or meaningful measurement being so young

I don’t know, but I think every parent think their kids are gifted, so I guess what the hell is the point of exclusivity

[Rhett]

For some reason, this talk of gifted classes reminds me of this episode of Beavis and Butthead:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ntDtfczrgT8

In particular, the scene where the gifted kid gets his brain stimulation device unplugged by Beavis tripping over the cord:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HcKUL5E2woc

Near the end of the deflation, the kid starts singing “Carry On, Wayward Son”.

[Rhett]

For some reason, this talk of gifted classes reminds me of this episode of Beavis and Butthead:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ntDtfczrgT8

In particular, the scene where the gifted kid gets his brain stimulation device unplugged by Beavis tripping over the cord:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HcKUL5E2woc

Near the end of the deflation, the kid starts singing “Carry On, Wayward Son”.

[Rhett]

For some reason, this talk of gifted classes reminds me of this episode of Beavis and Butthead:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ntDtfczrgT8

In particular, the scene where the gifted kid gets his brain stimulation device unplugged by Beavis tripping over the cord:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HcKUL5E2woc

Near the end of the deflation, the kid starts singing “Carry On, Wayward Son”.

[Rhett]

For some reason, this talk of gifted classes reminds me of this episode of Beavis and Butthead:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ntDtfczrgT8

In particular, the scene where the gifted kid gets his brain stimulation device unplugged by Beavis tripping over the cord:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HcKUL5E2woc

Near the end of the deflation, the kid starts singing “Carry On, Wayward Son”.

[Rhett]

For some reason, this talk of gifted classes reminds me of this episode of Beavis and Butthead:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ntDtfczrgT8

In particular, the scene where the gifted kid gets his brain stimulation device unplugged by Beavis tripping over the cord:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HcKUL5E2woc

Near the end of the deflation, the kid starts singing “Carry On, Wayward Son”.

[UCGal]

What GATE offers, in theory, is differentiation. Which *should* be offered to every student. What that means is that if a kid has mastered the topic being taught – they can be given material that either explores the topic more in depth, or moves on to a more advanced topic. This would benefit ALL kids – including those that are struggling – they could be offered a more remedial version of the topic, so that they get something out of it – rather than being assigned work that they don’t understand.

Unfortunately, GATE cluster teachers don’t always offer that.

My experience was very similar to KSM’s (probably a decade earlier…). I was not seminar – but many of my friends were… My “crowd” was the smart nerds. My best friend was never tested for GATE (they didn’t test every kid) but eventually they switched her to the high school counselor that handled GATE kids because she was in all the same classes, and excelling. At the time there was an assumption that GATE kids were college track, and the assumption wasn’t there for the other kids. (Some were… but it wasn’t assumed.)

I’m still friends with my high school crowd… so perhaps we were awkward and socially stunted… but the friendships remain. I went to my 30 year reunion last year – my friends didn’t. Looking at the success from a salary/fame point of view… my nerdy friends have done much better then the school population as a whole. (Harvard professor, JPL PhD, vp’s of various large tech companies… then lowly enginerds like me.)

GATE/Seminar… the program is only as good as the teachers. And some of the teachers are EXCELLENT. Others, truthfully, blow chunks.

[UCGal]

What GATE offers, in theory, is differentiation. Which *should* be offered to every student. What that means is that if a kid has mastered the topic being taught – they can be given material that either explores the topic more in depth, or moves on to a more advanced topic. This would benefit ALL kids – including those that are struggling – they could be offered a more remedial version of the topic, so that they get something out of it – rather than being assigned work that they don’t understand.

Unfortunately, GATE cluster teachers don’t always offer that.

My experience was very similar to KSM’s (probably a decade earlier…). I was not seminar – but many of my friends were… My “crowd” was the smart nerds. My best friend was never tested for GATE (they didn’t test every kid) but eventually they switched her to the high school counselor that handled GATE kids because she was in all the same classes, and excelling. At the time there was an assumption that GATE kids were college track, and the assumption wasn’t there for the other kids. (Some were… but it wasn’t assumed.)

I’m still friends with my high school crowd… so perhaps we were awkward and socially stunted… but the friendships remain. I went to my 30 year reunion last year – my friends didn’t. Looking at the success from a salary/fame point of view… my nerdy friends have done much better then the school population as a whole. (Harvard professor, JPL PhD, vp’s of various large tech companies… then lowly enginerds like me.)

GATE/Seminar… the program is only as good as the teachers. And some of the teachers are EXCELLENT. Others, truthfully, blow chunks.

[UCGal]

What GATE offers, in theory, is differentiation. Which *should* be offered to every student. What that means is that if a kid has mastered the topic being taught – they can be given material that either explores the topic more in depth, or moves on to a more advanced topic. This would benefit ALL kids – including those that are struggling – they could be offered a more remedial version of the topic, so that they get something out of it – rather than being assigned work that they don’t understand.

Unfortunately, GATE cluster teachers don’t always offer that.

My experience was very similar to KSM’s (probably a decade earlier…). I was not seminar – but many of my friends were… My “crowd” was the smart nerds. My best friend was never tested for GATE (they didn’t test every kid) but eventually they switched her to the high school counselor that handled GATE kids because she was in all the same classes, and excelling. At the time there was an assumption that GATE kids were college track, and the assumption wasn’t there for the other kids. (Some were… but it wasn’t assumed.)

I’m still friends with my high school crowd… so perhaps we were awkward and socially stunted… but the friendships remain. I went to my 30 year reunion last year – my friends didn’t. Looking at the success from a salary/fame point of view… my nerdy friends have done much better then the school population as a whole. (Harvard professor, JPL PhD, vp’s of various large tech companies… then lowly enginerds like me.)

GATE/Seminar… the program is only as good as the teachers. And some of the teachers are EXCELLENT. Others, truthfully, blow chunks.

[UCGal]

What GATE offers, in theory, is differentiation. Which *should* be offered to every student. What that means is that if a kid has mastered the topic being taught – they can be given material that either explores the topic more in depth, or moves on to a more advanced topic. This would benefit ALL kids – including those that are struggling – they could be offered a more remedial version of the topic, so that they get something out of it – rather than being assigned work that they don’t understand.

Unfortunately, GATE cluster teachers don’t always offer that.

My experience was very similar to KSM’s (probably a decade earlier…). I was not seminar – but many of my friends were… My “crowd” was the smart nerds. My best friend was never tested for GATE (they didn’t test every kid) but eventually they switched her to the high school counselor that handled GATE kids because she was in all the same classes, and excelling. At the time there was an assumption that GATE kids were college track, and the assumption wasn’t there for the other kids. (Some were… but it wasn’t assumed.)

I’m still friends with my high school crowd… so perhaps we were awkward and socially stunted… but the friendships remain. I went to my 30 year reunion last year – my friends didn’t. Looking at the success from a salary/fame point of view… my nerdy friends have done much better then the school population as a whole. (Harvard professor, JPL PhD, vp’s of various large tech companies… then lowly enginerds like me.)

GATE/Seminar… the program is only as good as the teachers. And some of the teachers are EXCELLENT. Others, truthfully, blow chunks.

[Author]

Posts