GothamSchools — daily independent reporting on NYC public schools

rejection

Shift in city’s priorities seen as gifted program denied expansion

Parents of children admitted to the STEM citywide gifted program at P.S. 85 attend an open house Wednesday.

Every morning, Tim Smith and his nine-year-old son leave their Bronx home at 7:30 a.m., catch a MetroNorth train to 125th Street and then board the M60 bus into Queens — all so the third-grader can attend P.S. 85 in Astoria, home to one of New York City’s handful of citywide gifted-and-talented programs.

Even so, they brace themselves for an even more difficult journey ahead: Finding a middle school.

In 2009, when P.S. 85′s program opened as part of an effort to expand gifted education, the Department of Education pledged “to identify nearby middle schools where students in these programs can continue after fifth grade.” But last month, responding to parents’ pleas to make good on the promise, the department informed them that P.S. 85 cannot handle expansion into a middle school because it is already “operating close to 100 percent capacity.” It said students in the gifted program — called the STEM Academy (it stands for Science, Technology, Enrichment and Math) — must go to middle school elsewhere.

STEM is the only citywide gifted-and-talented elementary school program that ends with fifth grade. (It is the only citywide gifted program housed within another school.) Three of the four other citywide programs — Manhattan’s Anderson School and TAG Young Scholars, as well as the Brooklyn School of Inquiry — continue through eighth grade, and Manhattan’s NEST+M carries students through the end of high school.

“The school was meant to be a peer for the other citywide gifted programs, and admission to a middle school program was supposed to be seamless,” said Smith.

STEM parents charge that their program has been neglected because of a shift in priorities at the Department of Education.

Under former schools chancellor Joel Klein, gifted education expanded at a rapid clip, with an eye on keeping young families in the city and choosing public schools. In 2009, gifted schools opened in Brooklyn and Queens, including at P.S. 85. Even more were promised on the way.

“We’re going to open citywide programs in other parts of the city in the coming years as we continue to increase our outreach about the admissions process and identify as many of our City’s gifted students as possible,” wrote Klein in a March 2009 press release.

Now, the office of gifted education, formerly run by Anna Commitante, no longer exists, and the link to it on the Department of Education’s website connects only to information about admission to gifted programs. The Department did not return repeated calls and emails for comment.

Parents recall that the office was dismantled amid transitions from Klein to former schools chancellor Cathie Black in favor of a more inclusive approach to education. They say that children in gifted programs are losing out as a result.

The office was “for people who were not just figuring out enrollment and doing testing, which is all they do now,” said parent Michelle Noris, who has a child at P.S. 85. “There were people who were working on curriculums and creating programs. … Focus away from gifted and talented programs is, I think, part of an overall approach to heterogeneous classes.”

Other parents note that while department officials have promised to open 50 new middle schools over the next two years, they have not designated any as a citywide gifted program.

Parents at P.S. 85 say the absence of a middle school diminishes the appeal of their program. They say all that they are looking for is a guarantee that the kids will have a place to go for grades six through eight. The Community Education Council for District 30 this week passed a resolution supporting their effort.

“STEM is the forgotten citywide program because it’s not Brooklyn or Manhattan. We are the only one that’s not K-through-8, we sort of feel like the forgotten citywide program,” said Michal Melamed, whose first-grade son commutes to P.S. 85 from Manhattan. “We want equity with the other citywide programs.”

The citywide programs require the highest scores for admission: To enter a program such as P.S. 85’s, children must have scored in the 97th percentile or above on two screening tests. Last week, parents found out whether their children had made the cut for this year — and more than 2,600 incoming kindergarteners scored high enough to qualify for admission to citywide programs. But last year, those programs had only about 300 seats, making admission about as likely as getting into Harvard University.

Pressed about the shortage of seats in gifted programs, Chancellor Dennis Walcott said this week that the department was looking for ways to accommodate more of the children whose scores qualify them for admission but that more seats would likely not be added to citywide programs.

For now, current STEM parents must decide whether to try to procure a spot in the other citywide programs (a very long shot) or seek alternatives for middle school. The program’s oldest students are in third grade this year.

“There is a fair amount of scientific literature that suggests that it’s really hard for kids to switch school in middle school,” said Melamed. “Data suggests that having a K-through-8 model is how most of our schools should run.”

Mehrunnisa Wani is a student at Columbia University’s School of Journalism. A version of this story originally appeared on New York World, a project of the journalism school.

  • Mr. Flerporillo

    “Parents at P.S. 85 say the absence of a middle school diminishes the
    appeal of their program. They say all that they are looking for is a
    guarantee that the kids will have a place to go for grades six through
    eight. The Community Education Council for District 30 this week passed a
    resolution supporting their effort.”

    Must be a real bummer to be in the same boat as the “non-gifted” slobs, I’m sure.

  • Michael M. (parent still)

    Re “But last year, those programs had only about 300 seats, making admission about as likely as getting into Harvard University.”

    Nah. Much LESS likely. I dare say the comparison understates the (citywide level) G&T seat shortage, for two reasons. 

    1) Programs – plural and total – have 300 seats for incoming K’s.  But Harvard is NOT the ONLY high-end university.  Therefore, admission to citywide G&T is an even longer long-shot, by an order of magnitude or so, and that’s before…

    2) Recognizing that anyone can apply to Harvard, but the “2,600 incoming kindergarteners” have ALREADY passed the screening tests.

    Very loosely, if there are 1.1 million kids in the system, there are roughly 85,000 kids per cohort over K-12.  Assuming our kids are comparably as bright as the national basis of the percentile distribution, 3% would be…. (not showing my work, risking point deduction)… 2,550.  300 is but 12% of the possible demand.  Then again, for the moment I’m assuming all parents have their kids tested, and would want a seat if offered, which I know is high.  On balance… the DOE doesn’t seem to be interested in any more than a token effort.

    So much for the DOE’s “choice” mantra.  Uh-gain.

    The next question is WHY:  G&T philosophy?  Capital budget constraints? Demographic considerations?  Or my personal favorite: wanting to keep brainy kids’ likely higher standardized test scores homogenized in with the rest of the schools.  Regardless, any of these have political overtones and undercurrents that wash over…. “children first.”

    P.S.  Per some Googling, Hahvahd average student IQ is circa 130.  IQ to be in the top 3%, also circa 130.

  • Ken Hirsh

    Good stuff.  How do you relate this subject to the charter school “creaming” debates, if at all?  It seems to me that some of the themes are the same.  

  • Michael M. (parent still)

    I hadn’t thought of it that way, but I get the point.  I dare say G&T programs make no pretense of serving a full cross-section, as do charters. 

    Downstream, I have no info on the “counseling out” dynamic of which some charters have been accused.

    I’d prefer to double back on why DOE favors one flavor of choice, but not others.  Perhaps if there were a “top 3%” charter….

  • Mr. Flerporillo

    Michael, I can’t quite tell what you’re saying in your last few paragraphs.  Are you saying that the DOE should be expanding the G&T programs?

  • Mr. Flerporillo

    “I hadn’t thought of it that way, but I get the point.  I dare say G&T programs make no pretense of serving a full cross-section, as do charters.”

    I suppose there are at least two objections built into the arguments about alleged “creaming” (God, what an unfortunate term) by some charter schools. There’s an objection based on the negative effect that “creaming” has on other schools, who lose their better students, which in turn arguably hurts the students left behind.  And there’s an objection based on the unfair advantage that a school that “creams” has in testing comparisons.  

    There is absolutely no question that the first objection should apply to the G&T programs.  Some might dispute the premise that losing better students hurts schools.  Some might accept the premise but contend that any damage caused by G&T programs is outweighed by the positives.   But I don’t see how this discussion should happen with regard to charters but not the G&Ts.

  • Ken Hirsh

    I agree with Mr. Flerporillo on this issue (especially with the “creaming” parenthetical comment).  

    I’d add that not only is the “creaming” discussion lacking the mention of G&T programs, but it is lacking the mention of the large percentage of schools and programs that, though not G&T, are selective in some significant regards.  In short, from what I understand, the “hurting students that are left behind” argument seems hypocritical when considering the overall school system.

  • Michael M. (parent still)

    I wasn’t taking a pro-con policy position either way. 

    If I were, I would distinguish between top 10% and top 3%.

    I am asking others to ask DOE to explain their apparent change in policy priorities.

    Personally, I am happy to have my kids integrated, regardless of how
    they tested or might test.  Then again our local elem school is great,
    and my one kid in a middle school is a happy camper.  So… the DOE’s lack of choice doesn’t kill me; I’m where I’d have chosen.  Other parents may differ; the choice they might prefer is not truly available.

    (Another accidental “like.”  On the house.)

  • Michael M. (parent still)

    Mr. F:  Friendly amendment possible third point for your list, related to your second, and back to one of mine:  Charters pretending to be something they’re not.  Again, if true re “creaming”.

    OTOH, one might argue that pulling, say a full 3% of K applicants out of district to a building elsewhere — howzabout TWEED?!? — relieves local Districts’ overcrowding, but I dare say the G&T crowd doesn’t deserve the shlep any more than the 97%-ers.

  • PS 85 parent

    In district 30, there are zoned middle schools.  All the other children at PS 85 will go automatically to IS 141, their zoned middle school.  None of them will have to test into a gen ed middle school program, if they do not want.

  • Michael M. (parent still)

    To Ken’s point below, one argument I’ve heard against middle school level G&T programs (implicitly district-level in this case), is that there already are  selective middle schools… and not enough of them.  So if there are spare seats to be had, allow all kids to be in the .

    Is “skimming” any better a term than “creaming?”  It’s “selective” only if — and here’s what I think is the pivotal point — above-board. 

    But let me be clear:  the charter conversation and the G&T conversation are each complex enough that I would not want to see a subtopic of charters used to cloud the entirety of the G&T topic.  Simply:  some parents want G&T, some parents want charters.  Why the disparate treatments by the Mayor and DOE? 

Tips, questions, feedback?

Contact us at .

Word from Our Sponsor

Follow GothamSchools

RSS
Subscribe to the daily email digest:

Chalk It Up

Recent Comments

20 comments so far today

Archives

May 2013
M T W T F S S
« Apr  
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031