Practice, Practice, Practice

Parents Forum
141

<p>Our state does fund "gifted and talented" - to the tune of about $140,000,000 or about 1% of the state education budget.</p>

<p>Unfortunately, the biggest stumbling block to the use of such funding is administrators who believe, like many who posted on this thread, that gifted is the result of guided practice or that all kids are gifted. For example, where there was once an attempt to differentiate AP classes - gifted and non-gifted, and group students accordingly; we are now likely to hear "But everyone taking AP is gifted" and the elimination of separate gifted classes. The teachers and students can "feel" the difference.</p>

<p>The other problem is that all "gifted" are not created equal - qualitatively nor quantitatively. Elementary pull-out programs may satisfy the needs of the moderately gifted but do not meet the needs of the more highly gifted. </p>

<p>My son, too, is in SET and we have not found benefit to being in the program.</p>

<p>Homeschooling has never been an option for my son due to his extreme extraversion and need to be with other students. Independent study in math was beneficial to him - allowing him to progress through Calculus by the end of middle school. However, it became problematic in high school - as he could not commute to the local university in the time allocated for one class period.</p>

142

<p>I concur with everything that both Marite and RM said. Actually, the SET bulletins are interesting to me; son has never cared one whit about them, including any of the mentoring or website stuff, which is too bad. I thought it was a great idea. Oh well.</p>

<p>I agree completely that there is an "everyone is gifted" mentality which has pervaded public school. It is really PC gone amuck where school personnel claim that everyone is equally capable. It's fundamentally untrue, and we do a disservice to the true gifted by lumping kids all together. My children spent years bored silly because teachers refused to do more than lateral enrichment. Thankfully, we have a great math department at the middle and high school levels, where the chair understood our dilemma. And we have an excellent university nearby for extension school classes, which is what the kids who have completed the high school curriculum do. However, if the parents are not proactive for their children, they would wallow in grade appropriate classes, since schools generally do not advance kids, compact curriculum, or grade skip (in my experience) without a good deal of parental intervention.</p>

<p>I don't think schools have a clue how to identify real gifted kids, and the gifted programs that exist are an absolute joke for the most part. Also, the identified kids are nothing like mine, or Marite's or Reflectivemom's. There is a huge difference between profoundly gifted kids and regular "gifted" kids. </p>

<p>In terms of TA's questions, I think schools could do a better job of real differentiated instruction; lateral enrichment, or a few extra workbook pages are nonsense. They could also recognize that not all children are gifted, and that the needs of gifted children are every bit as important as those with special needs. Teachers could be better trained to deal with extremely advanced students, and districts could have plans in place to deal with such students, even if they are somewhat rare.</p>

143

<p>I can only echo what Marite, RM and Allmusic have said. I found about Davidson when it was too late. My son missed SET by 20 points. My son skipped two grade of math in first grade and then wasn't allowed to go to fourth grade math by the second grade teacher. Until my son hit high school it was a constant struggle to get any kind of real accomodations. I would have been happy to homeschool, but he didn't want to. I do think that between the two of us it might have exacerbated his Aspergery tendencies. (Don't think he's on the spectrum, but he's quirky.) On the one hand I can see by the numbers that the elementary school is going to have a kid like him every few years at best. OTOH it's incredibly frustrating that it all has to be such a fight. It sure would help if they'd just recognize when they have an outlier.</p>

<p>My younger son who is merely moderately gifted was quite well served by a gifted program that believed only in lateral expansion of the curriculum.</p>

144

<p>Let me add one more thing, since TA was asking, what appear to be, earnest questions.</p>

<p>If you are really wondering what more schools can do to support extremely talented children, I would recommend greater facility and ease in putting together programs, even if they are atypical or unconventional, as well as having school personnel not poopoo parents or brush them off. </p>

<p>I remember vividly meeting with the principal of the school when my S was in third grade, after having already been dismissed by the teacher (who called son a "know-it-all"). We wanted to talk about how to advance son in math, so he could work at a level more commensurate with his ability (since he had completed all of the elementary curriculum at home by the end of grade one). The principal literally looked at H and me and said, "Mr. and Mrs. ___<strong><em>, I am an experienced administrator, and many parents like you think their children are more intelligent than they are. (Son's name)</em></strong>__ isn't anywhere near as smart as you think he is. At least half of the children in this school are as smart as _________. I'd suggest you have him try out for a sports team, since it isn't healthy to put so much emphasis on academics".</p>

<p>That patronizing attitude is absurd. We weren't trying to brag about our son. We just wanted to have his needs met, the same way a parent of a child with dyslexia wants that child's needs met. We found a similar attitude (different principal) when trying to advance our daughter in another subject. No wonder most parents feel cowed by the school "experts".</p>

145

<p>We did not encounter the attitude Allmusic reports. BUt we did have a second grade teacher who refused to allow S join the third graders in her combined 2/3 class on the grounds that tracking was against her egalitarian principles. The class was always broken down into groupsfor special activities, so having a special group would not have been disruptive. I should say that this teacher was excellent at teaching the humanities and social sciences and did not hesitate to give more advanced reading materials to the students who could handle it. She did not realize that she was being inconsistent.
In other cases, the teachers simply did not know how to address the needs of an advanced math/science students, having learned just enough to teach the curriculum and no more, and having no information about additional resources.</p>

<p>I know of one 4th grader in a suburban district who was so advanced that he could handle 9th grade math. The district accommodated him by sending a high school math teacher to his elementary school to teach him Honors Algebra. In districts where advanced high schoolers do not have easy access to local colleges, perhaps an expansion of the Virtual High School, or or the distance learning Harvard Extension classes could be a solution. These, however, should be supported by teaching staff, as it is not appropriate to let students learn totally on their own (practice must be guided, after all).</p>

146

<p>Things I could have done without, "they all catch up by third grade". Uh no they didn't, but you sure did your darndest to give them a chance to. The elementary school principal telling me her sons did just fine without skipping math courses and they got 700s on their SAT scores. I wasn't interested in her kids, my kid was bored to tears now. Distance learning, providing transportation to other schools, enabling subject acceleration are all possible solutions. But honestly, just taking parents seriously would be a big help. At least the first grade teacher got it when she had my son tested and found that he was on a fifth grade level for concepts and close to third grade on arithmetic mechanics. She went to bat and fought the principal tooth and nail, insisting that no she couldn't create an advanced math group because there were no other kids who could be in the group.</p>

147

<p>
[quote]
But is mental practice the same as physical practice?

[/quote]
The short answer is yes.

[quote]
Does an individual need the same level of automaticity in performing a mental activity such as arithmetics or higher mathermatics as an athlete or an artist, to the extent that thinking no longer enters into it?

[/quote]
Training as a fighter pilot comes to mind. There's a high level of cognitive skill as well as physicality (quick reflexes, coping with G forces, etc.) required. Automaticity is essential because of the potential for life-threatening situations that arise suddenly when there's simply no time to indulge conscious reasoning. Or if you prefer music or sports, see the original article for a discussion of "chunking" and stored working memory, which also apply to reading comprehension skill. Simply put, it's the ability to recall, and effectively utilize, familiar patterns in context. </p>

<p>The kind of practice is important. "Mindless" repetitive drills have their use (scales and arpeggios on the piano, shooting free throws over and over in basketball; IOW, targeted skill-building); but in order for learning to be effective in building expertise or mastery, it has to be scaffolded, guiding the learner from plateau to plateau, ever higher, each plateau a little beyond the current skill level (ideally under the guidance of a skilled teacher or coach, a "mentor"). That's why repetitive tasks for a learner who has already mastered a specific skill (solving the same types of math problems, re-reading the same leveled texts) are ineffective in building mastery. A skilled mentor is capable of challenging without overwhelming. It's a fine line to walk and probably no surprise that so few are really good at it.</p>

<p>Motivation plays a key role in engaging learners in the process. There's a mountain of current research to support this notion (Ericsson and others have written extensively on it). Mentors can effectively individualize (differentiate) instruction based on ongoing assessments. To do so requires time and resources, both of which are in short supply in the majority of schools. </p>

<p>That learning model is not what our schools were designed to do anyway. We're still operating on the old industrial production-line model of education: Put all the students on the conveyor belt in kindergarten, gear instruction to the norm at each step of the process, and send the good-enough finished product out at year 13. Outliers at both tails have always been ill-served. What we know now--and what the research is continuing to tell us--is that the vast middle is also ill-served, for the obvious reason. A child is not a car.</p>

148

<p>One of the problems with "one size fits all" education, is that while some children benefit from 50 problems, some only need 5, and yet are unduly penalized for not doing the other 45. My son has rarely done all the assigned problems (and some teachers let it go, and many didn't), and finally is in a class where homework is assigned but not "checked". He does what he needs to do, to ensure mastery, and no more. Typically he does less than a quarter of what is assigned, but it is enough for him to understand concepts and do well on tests.</p>

<p>The rigidity of everyone doing the same thing, in just the same way (all reading aloud from the same level book, for example, despite enormously disparate levels...an issue I had with my D's former classroom) is penny wise and pound foolish. It certainly is very expensive to fully differentiate (and I don't think most teachers are capable, since my son was well above most of his elementary teachers in math, which I have learned is very typical in such situations), but well educated, flexible curriculum specialists, could aid a great deal in this way, as these chilldren have a great deal to offer a classroom, other than simply being put in a mentoring position themselves.</p>

149

<p>An associate worked with students from a program for the extremely gifted who, for the first times in their lives, were having problems in school. Most of the problems were in mathematics, but there was a range. The problems were seldom with reasoning, but with missed fundamentals and lack of automaticity. With some practice with, often timed, on math facts, factoring, etc., their "gifts" would return.</p>

<p>For complex skilled performances, one must understand the nature of guided deliberate practice and what is involved. Though repetition is included, the study of complex performance has yielded an emerging understanding of what is required to attain expertise. The following link may be of interest to those interested in understanding what type of training and practice is required for complex motor skills: <a href="http://mechnerfoundation.org/pdf_downloads/skilled_performance.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://mechnerfoundation.org/pdf_downloads/skilled_performance.pdf&lt;/a> A simple scan of the table of contents is instructive.</p>

150

<p>
[quote]
Most of the problems were in mathematics, but there was a range. The problems were seldom with reasoning, but with missed fundamentals and lack of automaticity. With some practice with, often timed, on math facts, factoring, etc., their "gifts" would return.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>The knowledge gaps of advanced math students have been brought up time and again. and are often used to argue against curriculum acceleration. When my S took a class in mathematical probability, he had some difficulty because he had not learned differential equations (his Multivariable Calculus and Linear Algebra classes had not covered that topic). By the end of the class, however, he had learned enough to be able to follow. But his difficulty resulted in some lower scores on the midterm and some problem sets. I suppose he could have achieved a higher grade had he known differential equations from the get-go, but backfilling enabled him to catch up with the rest of the class by the end (Anyway, the grade appeared on his high school transcript as Pass)
In certain ways, problem-solving adopts the opposite approach to the drill approaach: a problem is posed, students must find a solution. Often, they learn what they need in order to solve the problem at hand. This was the approach in my S's math-enrichment class. My S has always loved logic puzzles. Perhaps one could see solving them as practice; but it is so different from doing the same exercises over and over again.</p>

151

<p>Marite, just a quick note: I have noticed, looking through this thread, that there are parents who see the term "practice" (which is the term I put in the thread title) and think "school worksheets," and there are other parents who see the same term, and think "intensive skill development," the kind of thing that jet fighter pilots, NBA basketball players, professional musicians, and top-level mathematicians all engage in. The terminology of the author mentioned in the book review that was cited in the original post is "deliberate practice," his own carefully defined term, and that author says very plainly in his book (which I am reading right now) that deliberate practice is not something offered up by school programs. My original post is not an endorsement of the lousy practices of most schools in dealing with gifted learners--I make no use of my friendly local public school system because I don't trust it to understand talent development. My friendly suggestion is to use your advanced language skills to read the book (which has many authors who are also second-language learners of English, taking great care to express new, unfamiliar ideas in precise language) and see how the articles there lay out a more hopeful path for advanced students to obtain appropriate education that builds career success.</p>

152

<p>"An associate worked with students from a program for the extremely gifted who, for the first times in their lives, were having problems in school. Most of the problems were in mathematics, but there was a range. The problems were seldom with reasoning, but with missed fundamentals and lack of automaticity. With some practice with, often timed, on math facts, factoring, etc., their "gifts" would return."</p>

<p>How many times I have heard this sad refrain!!!!</p>

<p>Especially when teachers discovered that my son had "self-taught" or "independently studied" his math from pre-algebra on, sitting in the back of the math class reading the book. Year after year, we were told my son had probably missed some fundamentals, he probably hadn't practiced enough, he would "pay" later. </p>

<p>Then they would have him in THEIR class and would finally understand. There were no gaps, he did understand, he hadn't "missed" anything. He scored so much higher than the other kids - who themselves were very gifted advanced students. So what did the teacher do when they finally got it? Let him sit in the back of their class and continue to read math books.</p>

<p>This is another "defining characteristic" about my son. He doesn't need to be "taught" math. He just needs a good text and very occasionally (and I mean very occasionally) access to a solution's manual.</p>

153

<p>Tokenadult:</p>

<p>Unfortunately, I am soon to take off for foreign climes and won't want to take such a book along with me. I'll try to read it when I return. </p>

<p>I do understand the total confusion of terms in this thread, which is why I asked about the difference between mental and physical activities, between school-style drilling and what you and others term guided practice. As I've said many times, I do not denigrate practice but question how far it can take someone absent some other factor, which one may wish to call innate talent.</p>

<p>For what it's worth I just posed the question to my S. I'll try to recap what he said here. In physical activities, improvement is cumulative, and practice is crucial to improvement. It does pay to dribble a ball 1,000times, to shoot hoops for hours on end. In math (he did not discuss other intellectual activities), practice is required to achieve an epiphany (his words), that is, the recognition of a particular pattern. Once that epiphany has been reached, further practice is no longer productive. One does not get epiphanies in basketball (maybe one does, he's not a basketball player). </p>

<p>I've also asked about his math classes since last year. Half of the homework, which has ranged from 6 to 12 problem sets per week, has been practice. But each week the problems are different. Old proofs can be used to tackle new problems, but they are not incorporated for the sake of further practice.</p>

<p>It seems to me that the way these homework assignments are set up suggests that the profs do not believe in much practice; once a student has recognized a pattern, s/he can move on to another topic. Perhaps this is why college courses move so much faster than high school classes, and advanced math classes move even faster than introductory ones. </p>

<p>One might argue that, without a foundation built on practice, such epiphanies are difficult to achieve. I just did not observe this to be the case with my S.</p>

154

<p>A quick note - I am not saying my son will never need a professor to "teach" or "guided/deliberate practice". I believe, if he continues to study math/physics which I don't know that he will, he will, one day, reach a point where he needs that help. I am just saying that up until this point he has not needed it.</p>

155

<p>We were initially a little concerned as S began compacting, that there would be skills he might miss. We have also not, as yet, found that to be the case. He has skipped entire years of instruction, and once joined a course half way through, having missed all of the instruction from Sept-Jan. He finished with an A for the year. His subsequent courses have called upon information from these gapped components, but, like RM's son, he has had no problem whatsoever.</p>

<p>In terms of musical practice, I agree that more practice is definitely preferable to less. But even in music, the greater musicality and proclivity has enabled my son to practice less than other kids, and continue to advance at a rapid rate, more rapid than those with less innate talent. </p>

<p>He has, however, been a source of frustration for at least one piano teacher, who saw what S "could be" if he had practiced 3-4 hours a day. Who knows where he would be if he practiced that much, but curiously, he is also extremely social and charistmatic, and spending that much time alone practicing doesn't interest him. So, he practices an hour to two max, and while he might have advanced even more quickly with twice the practice, he has still done extremely well, and maintained a good balance in his life thus far, for which we are all grateful.</p>

156

<p>Allmusic, you could be quoting my son's piano teacher! </p>

<p>In fact, my son told his teacher he knew that she preferred more serious piano students (most of her students are Asian and practice hours per day). He only practices a couple of hours a week. He said that if she would rather he find another teacher, he understood. She did an immediate about face. Saying, "Oh, I would never want to lose you as a student, I just wanted you to capitalize on your potential." In fact, even with his limited practice, he wins more piano competitions than her other students and she doesn't want to lose him.</p>

<p>He, too, is very social. He is involved in many extra-curricular activities at school as well as taking 6 AP classes plus college level math. Add to that several choral performance groups and leads in musical theater. I'm rather surprised he can even compete in piano performance, much less win competitions.</p>

157

<p>Reading the posts by Allmusic and reflectivemom, I can see grist for two different mills.</p>

<ol>
<li>What is called talent is the visible result of sustained. consistent, guided practice. If AM's and RM's sons had practiced more, their talent would have shined brighter.</li>
</ol>

<p>2.Other students need more practice to attain a level of proficiency which AM's and RM's sons achieve with far less practice. It is unclear that more practice will result in the other students being seen as talented.</p>

<p>A fair summary?</p>

158

<p>And adding on to Marite, I'd say the same could be said about my son and pure math as opposed to programming. He does well enough every year to qualify for the AIME, but he never practices ahead of time. He's looked at the artofproblemsolving website, but can't be bothered to actually do the deliberate practicing that would take him to the next level. It's always hard to tell with him whether he doesn't practice because he knows he can't be the best (which I think was part of why he dropped chess) or because he just isn't so interested that he wants to do the kind of practicing it required to be the best (definitely also a possiblity with chess).</p>

159

<p>I agree with Marite that sustained guided practice can be used to further one's accomplishments.</p>

<p>I agree with Marite that some students require a greater level of practice than others.</p>

<p>I disagree that "talent" is the result of "sustained consistent guided practice." I see talent as the "natural ability or gift" than can be developed through such practice. </p>

<p>I do not believe that everyone has the same gifts/talents - I believe there is such a thing as "natural ability" and some individuals have more and/or different abilities than others. Failure to acknowledge differing abilities is detrimental to those of both levels. Those with greater abilities get "held back" and those with lesser abilities who believe anything is possible with enough hard work are often pressured into anxiety attacks and breakdowns trying to "keep up."</p>

160

<p>
[quote]
I remember vividly meeting with the principal of the school when my S was in third grade, after having already been dismissed by the teacher (who called son a "know-it-all"). We wanted to talk about how to advance son in math, so he could work at a level more commensurate with his ability (since he had completed all of the elementary curriculum at home by the end of grade one). The principal literally looked at H and me and said, "Mr. and Mrs. ___<strong><em>, I am an experienced administrator, and many parents like you think their children are more intelligent than they are. (Son's name)</em></strong>__ isn't anywhere near as smart as you think he is. At least half of the children in this school are as smart as _________. I'd suggest you have him try out for a sports team, since it isn't healthy to put so much emphasis on academics".

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Gotta love those school administrators . . .</p>