- Home
- News Grid
- Local News
- Green Hawk
- Business
- Politics
- School Zone
- Nonprofits
- Missing Pets
- Multimedia
- Arts
- Movies
- Outdoors
- Sports
- News Releases
- Columnists
- Blogs
- Opinions
- Classifieds
- Advertise
- Donate
- Partners
Catherine Oliverio: A Solution to the GATE/Honors Controversy
I am an experienced special-education teacher who has been concerned with the issue of ability testing for more than 25 years. I also have spent a great amount of time pondering the use of the word “gifted.” I believe that all students — from the severely mentally challenged to the top academic achievers — are gifted in some area. All students deserve a learning environment in which they can reach their true potential. I am confident that the Santa Barbara School District has this desire for each and every one of its students.
How might this best be accomplished?
I believe that the vast majority of the letters regarding the GATE vs. Honors controversy have had an element of truth. I support most of the opinions expressed. How can this be? Because I can see all sides.
I see the school district’s desire to end an “exclusive” gifted program that overidentifies overrepresented students, providing them with a program that seems to be beyond the reach of underrepresented populations. I see the desire of the district to align its programs with those of the rest of the state.
I also see that parents want the best possible education for their children so that they may thrive. I see the sadness on the part of the non-GATE parents that their children feel they are “less than” the students who are identified as GATE. I feel their concerns about their children’s self-esteem plummeting because they are denied access to the world of elite public education. I see the fear that the children of the GATE parents have about their children being educated with less-motivated students. I see the concerns they have that curriculum will be “watered down” to reach the students in the middle levels of achievement if GATE classes are renamed Honors.
What can be done to satisfy all of these points of view? I support a four-tiered system. In addition to the critical programs now available to students identified with special needs, a four-tiered program would provide a stimulating education for all students, enabling them to achieve the fruition of their gifts.
The most logical tiers are as follows:
A remedial tier in place in the district, Advancement Via Individual Determination (AVID), is an excellent system designed to prepare students for four-year college eligibility. It has proven to bring out the best in students and close the achievement gap.
The next tier is College Preparatory. Already present in the district, these rigorous courses are designed to prepare students to achieve the goal of college attendance.
The third tier would be Honors, as is proposed by the Santa Barbara school board.
As written in the most recent proposal, access guidelines would include seventh- through 12th-grade students meeting and maintaining academic requirements. This is an excellent idea and would create an Honors population of high achievers who are not denied access because of ability test results. Honors courses are typically enriched and offer the same material as college prep courses, but in greater depth and at a faster pace.
The fourth and final tier should be for truly gifted students, perhaps renamed High Ability.
These classes would include students who are actually identified as the highest 5 percent on ability tests such as the Cognitive Abilities Test, which is already used, or a language-free test, when appropriate. The Naglieri Nonverbal Ability Test is useful for the fair assessment of ability in students who come from culturally/linguistically diverse backgrounds. The NNAT was chosen in the Beaverton, Ore., School District because it was looking for a means to identify gifted students who were not performing well on academic achievement tests or ability tests. This test is used to identify students for their “Summa” program for highly gifted students.
Thus, the fourth tier would be made up of students who actually test in the highly gifted range.
Students would not be placed in High Ability classes because parents fearing the alternative find a way to put them into the program. Imagine students from all ethnic backgrounds being served by a program designed to help the future physicians who may finally find a cure for cancer, a program that appropriately serves the needs of the gifted students who are shown by research to be at risk for depression, social isolation and underachievement when their academic needs are left unsatisfied.
This four-tiered approach could be implemented with little cost and with great satisfaction to all parents and their children.
Let us serve the needs of all students.
— Catherine Oliverio of Goleta has a master’s degree in special education and taught in the field for 12 years. Her son is a junior high school student in the Santa Barbara district.
Comments
Noozhawk's comments are moderated, but by posting here you accept your responsibility to follow our rules as part of Noozhawk's shared online community. Please keep your comments civil and helpful. Don't attack other readers personally, and do not use vulgar, abusive or discriminatory language. Use the "Report Abuse" link if a comment violates these standards or our Terms of Use.
» on 03.15.10 @ 06:38 PM
This is a very thought-provoking, well thought out solution to the problem!
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 03.15.10 @ 08:31 PM
Cathy’s ideas are excellent and are worth serious examination. I also believe most budget problems could be solved by controlling the waste we all see in our childrens classrooms and in the school district over all.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 03.16.10 @ 07:07 AM
Catherine, this is an excellent article. Have you presented your ideas to the board before it is too late? This is just another example as to why we need to slow this process down for a more in depth evaluation and discussion.
Presently, the proposed criteria to enter the new Honors program will result in the vast majority of students in Honors. They have not estimated it or considered that many parents with their children in the present Honors program will not tolerate their child going into College Prep. The four levels proposed by Catherine have merit. Only the students in GATE that are truly GATE by testing in could be at the highest level. This would remove any controversy in the program and at the same time have a more customized approach for every student.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 03.16.10 @ 07:20 AM
Great ideas, but too bad she has NO CLUE what type of program AVID is! I cringe as I read her description of the remedial tier: “A remedial tier in place in the district, Advancement Via Individual Determination (AVID), is an excellent system designed to prepare students for four-year college eligibility. It has proven to bring out the best in students and close the achievement gap.” AVID IS NOT A REMEDIAL PROGRAM!
There is specific criteria for students in the AVID elective courses: 2.5-3.5 GPA and proficienct CST scores. Instead, the AVID program needs to appear in her college preparatory tier and even some of the honors students will greatly benefit from AVID!
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 03.16.10 @ 09:11 AM
These are great ideas…I would prefer 5 or 6 levels with movement between them in both directions depending upon the course but this is infinitely better than what we have now. Of course, with class sizes going up, how are the “Summa” or highest level classes going to be kept only for the top 2-5%? Will their class sizes be so much smaller than everyone else’s that once again a real disparity will exist?
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 03.16.10 @ 12:02 PM
AVID: Please forgive me for my inappropriate description of the AVID Program. Here is a description from the SBSD Website: (AVID at the Secondary School Level)
“AVID targets students in the academic middle – B, C, and even D students – who have the desire to go to college and the willingness to work hard. These are students who are capable of completing rigorous curriculum but are falling short of their potential. Typically, they will be the first in their families to attend college, and many are from low-income or minority families. AVID pulls these students out of their unchallenging courses and puts them on the college track: acceleration instead of remediation.” By the way, I did describe the program as as one that will prepare students for college. I kept it separate from Regular College Prep because they are selected and put in a special program designed to (in my words ) remediate their falling short of their true potential. But you are right, it is an acceleration program. I am sorry that remediation has such a bad connotation. As a special educator, I always see a program that helps students to accelerate as “remediating” gaps in achievement. By the way, the discussion is reduced to an emotional level when a remark is made that a person “doesn’t have a clue.”
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 03.16.10 @ 12:06 PM
SB Native: The class sizes would be the same as for other programs. The test percentage necessary to qualify would be adjusted per the number needed to fill the class. As such, only the highest potential students (from all backgrounds) would be admitted.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 03.16.10 @ 03:28 PM
With all due respect, I don’t believe the writer has an understanding of how the high schools currently function, just like most parents had no idea that the “GATE” classes were already open to non-GATE students through recommendations and test scores.
AP, IB, and dual-enrollment classes are open access to high school students. There is no need to separate these into Gifted and Honors (and it would be a logistical impossibility). And because the high schools operate this way, it makes sense for the feeder schools to be consistent with the schools for which they prepare students.
The problem isn’t, as she fears, that these students are not having their academic needs satisfied. In fact, with AP, IB and dual-enrollment, UCSB enrichment programs, Science Bowl, Engineering and Arts Academies, Mock Trial, UCSB research programs, etc, etc.—the opportunities for enrichment both in and out of the classroom have never been better. Our highest achieving students can advance as fast as they’d like and have access to all kinds of challenging and stimulating programs (an embarrassment of riches compared to most districts). And, I may add, the programs are much better and more diverse than those that can be found at most private schools.
The goal of the district is to better prepare and include more students in these programs. There are criteria in place if students fall behind or can’t keep up. Teacher training is a priority of the new plan (something that was not in place before). Schools throughout the state and nation, including those that perform at the very highest level, use the policies that the district is trying to implement (but from all the hullabaloo, you’d think that they were trying to ram through some crazy plan). There is no nefarious desire to dumb down the classes and it is insulting to most teachers when we hear this. Have some faith in the professionals who by and large support this policy overwhelmingly.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 03.16.10 @ 04:02 PM
Teacher Perspective: With all do respect, you are speaking primarily about the high school programs. The junior high parents are especially concerned about the possible changes. My letter was written particularly in response to those concerns. Of all the programs listed, the vast majority are HIGH SCHOOL programs. I know it may be difficult to face the concerns of junior high parents, but I have spoken to them and my letter was an answer to these conversations and discussions at meetings. I should have mentioned that in my letter.
On the contrary, I see no nefarious plan on the part of the district to dumb down the classes. I am concerned, in part, about the lack of identification of underrepresented populations in the GATE program, as well as the over-representation of students who do not qualify as truly highly gifted. This is of special concern at the junior high level, as previously stated. For that matter, I imagine that the participation of underrepresented students in the AP, IB, etc. programs is not what we as citizens would hope that it would be. It all begins in the elementary years and I would like us to do a better job at educating all citizens. I don’t think any educator would want to prevent that from occurring. I do support the district programs and coming from private school I am very impressed with all of the offerings.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 03.16.10 @ 04:04 PM
To Teacher’s Perspective. I understand your point of view and most of it makes sense. However, when one hears at meetings that there are NO students in the current Honors program that will be placed in College Prep it leads one to believe that the new Honors Program is simply a merge between GATE and Honors. If that is the case then about 75 to 85% of students will be at the same level. The proposed criteria for entrance into the new Honors Program is very low. The training that you speak of as being a priority will come while these classes are in progress. I believe the board is moving too fast on this issue and simply waiting until there is more time for the training first as well as a more organized and well thought out transition is very reasonable. I agree at the high school level the change is mitiagated but that is not the case at the elementary and junior high school level. This year with all of the budget cuts and increases in class size is not the time to layer on this issue in hastily.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 03.16.10 @ 04:58 PM
The writer must be corrected re: AVID. It is not a remedial program. AVID targets students in the academic middle - B, C students - who have the desire to go to college and the willingness to work hard. These are students who are capable of completing rigorous curriculum but are falling short of their potential. Typically, they will be the first in their families to attend college, and many are from low-income or minority families. AVID pulls these students out of their unchallenging courses and puts them on the college track: acceleration instead of remediation.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 03.16.10 @ 08:19 PM
Nosotros: Please see my previous response to AVID. I have already clarified this point and have been corrected. Thank you.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 03.22.10 @ 11:55 AM
What a great article!! I agree a four tier program would meet most everyone’s needs. Well written and a very good solution. I am a mother of a current Santa Barbara school district high school Senior.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
More Local News »
Wayne Mellinger: Triple Challenged Can’t Grapple with Their Demons Alone
For the homeless, the mentally ill and the addicted, society needs to step up with institutional help
George Runner: New Tax Interpretation Will Help Farmers Switch to Solar Power
California Board of Equalization clarifies exemption, ensuring its availability for agricultural expenses
Patty DeDominic: What’s On the Minds of High Achievers?
Take control of 2012 with a look at your health, wealth and time management
Adam Probolsky: Voters Are Receptive to Raising Local Revenues
Recent elections indicate voters don't lump in local government with institutional dysfunction in Sacramento and Washington
Helene Schneider: Mayor’s Year-End Message to Santa Barbara Community
There were many accomplishments in 2011 for which the city's residents can be proud, with much work still to be done in 2012
Weather: Fair 44.0º
Search Noozhawk »
