GATE Frequently Asked Questions

From the San Diego Unified School District web site:

• GATE Cluster Short Guide

• GATE Seminar Short Guide

• How to Complete the Seminar Intent to Enroll Process

• GATE Identification FAQs

• GATE Program Summaries

Is it true that GATE is not needed because the Common Core now provides enough rigor in a general education classroom?

The Common Core is a set of grade-level standards, in certain content areas, developed to help provide better consistency in curriculum across district and state lines. But it is not a clearly articulated set of differentiated content and instructional strategies designed to meet the needs of academically talented students. For advanced students, who may meet the standards before the end of the year, fidelity to grade-level standards will limit learning.

I’ve heard that GATE is not needed because all the students in our school are exposed to depth and complexity and that all our teachers are GATE certified so GATE classes are not needed.

Not all students have the special educational (or social emotional) needs that gifted students do, so this doesn’t make sense. Academically, not all students could cope with the differentiated curriculum and instructional methods used in a gifted classroom. Being gifted is not only about being academically advanced, and in fact some gifted students are under-achievers or are twice-exceptional and have specific needs. Also think of it this way: a teacher may be fluent in French, but that doesn’t mean that all their students are learning to be French-speakers. So just because a teacher is GATE certified doesn’t mean they are actually using those instructional methods in every classroom.

Does GATE mean that the good students get the good teachers and the others get the bad teachers?

Being high achieving doesn’t mean the student is better than the others. They’re just different. GATE certified teachers have been trained to understand the special needs of gifted students and differentiate the curriculum to match the student’s needs. If there are “bad” teachers at your school, that is a whole different issue that has nothing to do with gifted students.

Is treating gifted kids differently elitist?

GATE grouping facilitates learning at the level the students are capable of and to meet specific educational needs. One group is not better than another. Also, if the students in the gifted program do not represent the diversity of the student population, that may reflect how ability or achievement is being measured. This is not the fault of the gifted students or their families. Gifted students occur across the spectrum, in all student groups. We cannot use an equity argument to withhold GATE from all students. We should be working together to increase equitable access to GATE for more students, not restrict it for all students.

Some people say that gifted kids don’t need any help. They have it made. Other students have greater needs.

All students, including gifted students, have the right to an appropriate education. Education is not a “zero sum game” where one group must lose, for another to gain. There is an important difference between “equality” (everyone gets the same) and “equity” (giving each child what they need). Too often school reform efforts focus entirely on those who (for a hundred reasons) are struggling to achieve academically. As a result, we tend to neglect the kids who are academically able—but whose schools do not challenge them to achieve all that they’re capable of. A widely noted recent study by Alex Bell and colleagues at the Equality of Opportunity Project highlighted the inexcusable number of “Lost Einsteins” among American students, most of whom come from disadvantaged backgrounds. Giftedness is a cross-cutting issue that warrants attention precisely because gifted students may also be minorities, low-income, English-language learners, LGBTQ, learning- or physically disabled. Offering gifted education is an important step towards harnessing today’s enthusiasm for personalized learning and the technologies that facilitate it, not only to customize children’s education experiences but also to allow able students to move ahead when they’re ready (paraphrased from Chester E. Finn, Fordham Institute).

The NAGC says: “Would you send a star athlete to train for the Olympics without a coach? Gifted students need guidance from well-trained teachers who challenge and support them in order to fully develop their abilities. Many gifted students may be so far ahead of their same-age peers that they know more than half of the grade-level curriculum before the school year begins. Their resulting boredom and frustration can lead to low achievement, despondency, or unhealthy work habits.”

Isn’t it true that grouping students by ability isn’t a picture of the “real world” since students have to learn to get along with others?

Actually, as adults in the real world, we are often grouped - by the jobs we take, the skills we learn, our interests, and the amount of education we acquire. In sports, nobody would dream of telling a skilled athlete that he or she has to be held back and train with amateurs for the sake of learning to “get along” in the world. Learning to respect other people, and learning the skills required to get along with others is something all students need to do and is an issue entirely separate from GATE.

Our principal says that keeping the brighter students in a regular classroom raises the quality of work in the whole class.

Bright children are sent to school to be fully educated, not to act as informal teaching assistants. To prevent them from having access to the special educational services they need to make a year’s worth of growth in their own right is an exploitation of their abilities for the benefit of the teacher and the rest of the class.

There’s no need for GATE in high school because we have AP classes instead.

While AP classes offer rigorous, advanced coursework, they are not a gifted education program. The AP program is designed as college-level classes taught by high school teachers for students willing to work hard. The program is limited in its service to GATE students in two ways: First AP is limited by the subjects offered, which in most districts is only a small handful. Second it is limited in that, typically, it is offered only in high school and is generally available only for 11th and 12th grade students. The College Board acknowledges that AP courses are designed for any student who is academically prepared and motivated to take a college-level course.

Some people believe the concept of giftedness is not necessary to reach the goal of challenging all learners since teachers can ask: "Who is not being challenged in my classroom today?"

If teachers could instinctively tell which students were gifted and required differentiated content, that would be terrific. Then there would be no bored, unhappy gifted students in class who are just coasting (or causing disruption) but clearly that is not the case. Teachers alone should not be placed in the position of identifying these students because they may not be unbiased and can overlook gifted students. Giftedness can be masked by other special needs, and can be confusing to diagnose. An objective multi-factor process that includes, but does not rely on, teacher opinions should be used to screen for and identify gifted students.

Isn’t it true that every school has students (and not just those we deem gifted) who could do more if they were appropriately challenged?

Absolutely! No GATE advocate would argue with this. But this viewpoint also supports the rationale for GATE. All students should learn to reach and stretch a little beyond their comfort zone, including the gifted students. This develops grit, a growth mindset, and task persistence, which are undeniably valuable for all children. It is not an argument against GATE.

Some people say that slapping a label on a young child is harmful.

The more highly gifted a child is, the more likely it is that they already know that they are different. Ignoring or hiding that difference sends a terrible message that “I am not okay”. This puts our sensitive children at risk for negative self-concept as well as social exclusion. A healthy self-concept is essential for positive emotional, cognitive and social development. It depends upon healthy identity formation, which arises from understanding and accepting oneself. All parts of the child need to be incorporated to assist in complete identity formation. We shouldn’t omit informing the child about their giftedness any more than we should hide their ethnicity, culture, or other inherent parts of their being. It is important, if not imperative, to have conversations about giftedness with gifted children. See article by San Diego-based psychologist Carolyn Light - “All of Me” in the Summer 2009 issue of Gifted Education Communicator 40(2):19-22

Does labelling a child as gifted puts undue pressure on them to perform?

It is important to remember that what we say to a child, and how we say it, has consequences. If you discuss giftedness with children by telling them that they are smart or special or superior, then yes, they may internalize high expectations and feel pressure to live up to those. If we instead treat giftedness as part of who the child is as a whole, and discuss it as exploring a pattern of their abilities, strengths and weaknesses, then it can actually help them form a positive and healthy self-identity. Discussions of characteristics, learning profiles and cognitive style actually can be informative for gifted children and assist their academic and intellectual growth.

Are gifted students good at everything. If they aren’t then how can they be gifted?

Generalizing about any group isn’t helpful and can perpetuate misconceptions. Gifted students often exhibit an unevenness in their strengths and weaknesses due to a mismatch between their cognitive, emotional, and physical development. This is known as asynchrony. Students may show an aptitude in one area and not in another or they may be intellectually advanced but emotionally challenged, so giftedness isn’t even across all domains. The NAGC says: “It is important for parents, teachers, and caregivers to realize that "one size does not fit all" for gifted children--and even those with similar IQ scores may not have similar skills, personalities, rates of development, abilities, or interests. The individual traits of one gifted child may be extremely different from another. Also, the more highly gifted the gifted child, the more asynchronous they may be.”