Public Schools must support gifted students better to deliver on equity

Sam and Peter are two bright students who both stand out from the rest of their class. They are in the same school, but come from very different family backgrounds. Sam’s parents are college educated with jobs in software companies, giving them flexible work hours and the ability to spend time with Sam. Peter’s parents, on the other hand, did not finish college and don’t have the same flexibility.

As Sam and Peter progress through the school over the next few years, can you guess who continues to do well in academically, and who doesn’t live up to their full potential?

Both kids will graduate, and both kids will have had access to the same education at school — no different than all the other kids in the school. And yet, the fact that Sam’s parents were better educated and had more time to spend with him gave him a better shot.

Is this equitable? Shouldn’t the educational system that speaks of equity be doing better to deliver on its promise?

The problem is that equity in public schools often translates to no child getting support better than another, and in the process we lower the bar to meet the lowest common denominator. It is undoubtedly important that we serve all kids, and provide them access to quality education. However, in order for us to create a path out of poverty for families, it is important that schools provide support for gifted and talented children.

I grew up in India. My father was the only one out of his 8 siblings who went to college. He worked to pay his way through college, and ensured I had access to the best education possible. Growing up, I never saw specialized programs for gifted students, but nevertheless these students were nurtured by teachers — irrespective of their background. Education and success in academics was the path for upward mobility for nearly everyone.

In the US, however, I find that we take steps backward when we cut funding in public schools for gifted students in the name of equity. For instance, in California, funding for GATE (Gifted and Talented Education) was pulled in favor of school districts implementing something called “Local Control and Accountability Plan (LCAP).” Different districts will interpret and implement it differently, and almost no district whose LCAP goals and plans I’ve looked at are trying to help the gifted students through school provided resources.

We love to lament the poor Math scores of our students, but when it comes to addressing the issue we settle for just having kids graduate.

We need to do the opposite. We should have a reasonable bar for graduation, but also create programs to support and encourage students who can meet a much higher bar. If the school system provided such support, students like Peter can overcome the generational advantage that students like Sam have.

Funding programs for gifted students in public schools is the means to provide equity.