Posted on September 1, 2011

Back to School: Are We Leaving Gifted Students Behind?

Stacy Teicher Khadaroo, Christian Science Monitor, August 31, 2011


If public education helps all students achieve basic skill levels, is that enough? Should it be up to parents and students to find ways to take learning to a higher level, or does society have something to gain if more schools make it part of their mission?


One of the joists in the “class ceiling” that many observers point to is No Child Left Behind (NCLB). The goals of the federal education law, in effect since 2002, include bringing all students up to math and reading “proficiency”–grade-level skills–and closing achievement gaps correlated with race, income, and other factors.

Laudable goals, most agree, but critics take issue with how the resulting testing system has dominated schooling and led to unintended consequences–like neglect of students who might otherwise zoom ahead.

“Because the accountability systems are so focused on the lowest-performing students, teachers see A’s and B’s and good standardized test scores and they say, ‘OK, they’re fine, we don’t have to focus attention on them,’ ” says John Bridgeland, chief executive officer of Civic Enterprises, an education and policy think tank in Washington, D.C.

The teaching in many schools is prescriptive, even scripted. “We have squeezed out of the curriculum the kinds of things that really contribute to the next generation of highly creative, productive, inventive, entrepreneurial people,” says Joseph Renzulli, director of the National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented at the University of Connecticut in Storrs. It happens most “oppressively” in schools that serve poor and minority children, he adds.

Nearly 80 percent of teachers surveyed in 2008 by the conservative Thomas B. Fordham Institute in Washington agreed that “getting underachieving students to reach proficiency has become so important that the needs of advanced students take a back seat.”


There’s no national policy requiring that gifted children be identified and served by school districts. There’s no national definition of “gifted.”

The only federal program to support gifted education, known as the Javits Act, used to supply about $7 million a year, mainly for research on how to better identify and serve poor and minority gifted students. But Congress eliminated it this year.

State policies are a patchwork. About one-quarter of states provide no funding for gifted education, and 13 states bar students from entering kindergarten early, according to the National Association for Gifted Children (NAGC) in Washington.


The United States ranks 31st out of 56 nations in the percentage of students with advanced math skills, says Mr. Hanushek. Just 6 percent of American 15-year-olds scored at the advanced level in math on the 2006 Program for International Student Assessment, run by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. That compares with 28 percent in Taiwan and more than 20 percent in both Finland and Korea.


In some schools, technology is being deployed to give students more individualized tasks at whatever level challenges them.

But the majority of teachers know little about strategies to meet gifted students’ needs. Only five states insist that all teachers have training in gifted education before they begin their jobs, notes a 2009 report by the NAGC. In 36 states, no such training is required of general education teachers at any point in their careers.

Students should be grouped by ability, some parents and educators say. But how that’s done can be controversial. “Tracking” became a subject of hot debate in the 1980s, with critics saying that students who start off at a disadvantage, particularly minority and low-income kids, often get stuck in low-level classes and are not being prepared for higher education or skilled jobs.

Now, in some circles, even talking about ability grouping can be taboo. But supporters say the pendulum has swung too far.

“We have no problem having [varsity sports teams] and lavishing attention on those kids . . . . But we don’t do that for math . . . literature . . . science,” says Mr. Loveless, author of “The Tracking Wars.”

In an early 1990s analysis of hundreds of studies of ability grouping, researcher James Kulik found that high-IQ students in accelerated groups outperform nonaccelerated students of the same age and IQ by the equivalent of a full year of academic gain on achievement tests.

There is research on both sides of the debate, however, and detracking advocates say that’s the better approach. What’s needed, they say, is a high bar for all students–with teachers getting the support they need to engage both the strugglers and the high-achievers.


41 responses to “Back to School: Are We Leaving Gifted Students Behind?”

  1. Sureesh says:

    Back in the 1980s, the vast majority of gifted students were white. However, nowadays, there are a large number of Asian (both South and East Asians) in the higher end districts in California. So you can no longer play the “whites= gifted, minorities= stupid” card when Chinese and Indian kids routinely outachieve whites. In fact, even though Asians only make up 10 percent of the U.S, they would make up over 20 percent of “gifted kids”.

  2. neanderthalDNA says:

    OK. Thank God I’m out of that sickening, no win game known as “education”.

    Got a good pal, though, still in that grindhouse, and learned something interesting from him recently (he IS a good teacher after all…).

    I remember way back when, when there were basically three levels of classes. The lowest were called something like “remedial”, or “basic”. The middle had no designation, and the most demanding were called something like “advanced” or “gifted” or “college prep”.

    A few years ago, while I was teaching, I noticed the archetypal feel-good, educababble, Orwellian duckspeak sophistry working strange wonders on how youngsters were “tracked” (which became a bad word). First, the lowest levels were renamed something akin to “regular”. So “regular” was really code talk for “substandard”. At the time I found that DARKLY indicative of the general decline of Western civilization as evinced by our stupid public schools.

    But talking to my friend recently, he mentioned that he had a couple or three “college prep” sections.

    “Oh? Really? Well, that’s not so bad…” I responded.

    But no. I was wrong. Apparently today “college prep”, at least in my little corner of diversity dystopia, means what “regular” once meant, which is pretty damned close to what “remedial” meant before…

    Quack quack quackity quack, dippy libs! Maybe THIS duckspeak will get them little black kids achieving the way your broken ideology says they should!

  3. patthemick says:

    If every state has programs to promote the attaining of excellence in education you will damage the self esteem of less gifted students. We cannot have that. Even if it means our genius students will have to rely on luck for anyone to find them and train them for the future. It’s far better for the U.S. to fall behind and turn into a third world country. We are talking about self esteem here people and nothing is more important.

    (This message brought by public teachers Association of America)

  4. NBJ says:

    Well of course they are being left behind and neglected. They would be majority white now wouldn’t they? Who cares about THEM anymore? I read an article here on AmRen where a school in Chicago did away with Honors classes because they were “too white”, and not enough minorities were getting a “chance” to take these Honors classes. Nonsense! Nobody was stopping them from taking those classes, they simply didn’t have the smarts to.

    Their solution was to do away with Honors classes, dumb them down, then have the gall to still give them Honors credits for them. Now who does this hurt the most?

    On the first day of my daughters Honors Biology class, the teacher sent home a letter explaining our county had mandated a detailed curriculum to distinguish Honors classes from regular classes, and that in his opinion, Honors students should expect more rigorous coursework, and that is exactly what they would get. Thank goodness the entire Country hasn’t lost it’s mind in this PC nonsense when it comes to learning.

  5. Detroit WASP says:

    The next step will be to ostracize, ridicule and belittle the smart kids for not agreeing that the world is flat and race is a social construct. Only kool-aid drinkers allowed in the “open minded” group.

    Actually, my mistake…they already do that.

  6. Utah Observer says:

    Interesting article my son is 4 on both sides of our family there are people of high intelligence. He was reading when he turned 2 he reads at a 4th grade level now. He also has had tutors in Mandarin and Spanish since he was 2 he now uses all 3 languages fluently. In mathematics he is off of the scale also. We are going to homeschool why would we put him in public school he would be bored out of his mind for at least 5 years. I ask people would you feed your family at a soup kitchen? Would you put your family in public housing? Would you sell your car and take your family everywhere in public transportation? If not then why would you send your children to public school?

  7. Techno Dan says:

    “We have squeezed out of the curriculum the kinds of things that really contribute to the next generation of highly creative, productive, inventive, entrepreneurial people…”

    Of course. That was the point. We don’t need those kind of people in a Socialist Republic. We need dumbed-down worker-bees.

  8. Anonymous says:


    Not necessarily so. Students who are OK from the midbrain on down to below the neck somehow realize that stature is a ratio–

    you’re big according to how well you do with what you have to do with. Most such students who bat a flat .200 are glad and proud to even say “hi” to another kid that bats, say, .350. That’s

    America–or, at least, it’s West Texas.

  9. Anonymous says:

    “Differentiation in the Classroom” is code for having all ability levels of student in the room at the same time. The theory is, in order to master something, you must be able to teach it…so my school district tries to get the G/T kids to “teach” the remedial ones (think about just the insurance implications of that, will you–when a dim kid with an emotionally disturbed label on his individual education plan gets told how to do something by a smart kid…)

    Lots of teachers are not bright. The G/T kid is frustrated and has the potential to do all kinds of things. The G/T teachers do not, themselves, have to be G/T. Gifted people think a little differently than “normals”–they can get from point A to point H without processing the intermediate points. They out-think, out-create, etc. “Normal” teachers believe that loading G/T kids with just extra work or harder work is the answer. It’s not. Gifted kids are the creative ones. They are not merely the “smarter” Advanced Placement students; they have the creativity component to bring to the table. That creativity MUST be nurtured.

    G/T students are part of the group labled “Special,” although the Special Education resources are poured into the students at the other end of the Special spectrum.

    If there is any way possible, please, please tutor your children or home school them. They are vital to our survival as a civilization.

  10. Anonymous says:

    One of the results of “make believe” equality in gifted education programs has been the various “compensatory” standards for the admission of largely minority students who by mere IQ scores, would not quite clear the hurdle. An IQ difference of, say, 10-15 points (if validly measured) tends not to be so conspicuous in truly elective social interactions. But in gifted

    classes and group activities, it can show up in rather constant

    “Prufrock” frustrations for the lower functioning minority student and a kind of feigned “we-don’t-notice” effort by the other detectably somewhat brighter kids. It amounts to just another manifestation of the War Against Realism and certainly does nothing positive in the long run for race relations.

  11. Anonymous says:

    The tracking debate of the ’80’s is but another indication of how the experiences and observations of actual classroom teachers and students who’ve “been there, done that” get by-passed too easily. There are few arrangements of any kind in public schools that get carried out with the degree of competence that would keep a private business solvent. Disallowing the pervasive bumblers, we can affirm that the tracking programs in reasonably capable hands were generally felt to produce much more efficient education and less frustration. When they were abandoned, a lot of reliance was then put on cooperative learning arrangements. While these should not be whole-hog rejected by conservatives, they tended, also, not to be competently implemented or, moreso, to work out in practice like a car hitting on only half its cylinders. This meant that brighter kids were complaining at home to their parents that they were being short-changed by having to sit while slower kids muddled and by being drawn into lifting them up while neglecting their own progress. Odd how little the kids and parents know and how much omniscience resides in Skools of Educashun and the MEdia.

  12. Rhialto says:

    Correction: Schools are not leaving intelligent students behind. They are denying intelligent white male students from non-wealthy families educational opportunities. They are doing so deliberately, and it has nothing to do with helping any other group.

  13. Old School Gal says:

    She calls “No Child Left Behind” a laudable goal. I call it laughable. Just more lies from the leftist Ruling Elites who will say anything to make it look like they care. Intelligent students were left behind long ago and most of our educational resources has gone to try and raise up the students of lower IQs. They have never cared what it would do to the more intelligent student who has to attend public schools.

    As a high school student between the years 1971 through 75, I saw the implementation of this in one of my advanced classes. I was taking Chemistry and in class one day when my teacher came in looking very disturbed. We all noticed and asked her what was wrong. This is what she said “I’ve just come from a faculty meeting that has upset me very much. You know how you had to have teacher approval to get into this class because it’s considered “advanced”? And all of your teachers had to sign off on it? Well, the administration of this school and many other schools have eliminated the need to make advanced classes “teacher approved”. When one of the students asked what this meant, she answered “this means any student who so desires to take an advanced course can, even if they are not qualified. That means you gifted students in the coming years will be sitting next to idiots who do not belong in advanced classes and I am going to have teach “down” to them! You will be the ones made to suffer, you will not be getting my best and will be bored out of your minds!” She was mad.

    I was too young at the time to fully appreciate what this meant. In my Algebra class the following year I had another irate teacher. On his board one day were simple addition and subtraction problems, math I had learned in third or fourth grade. His new freshman class did not know simple addition and subtraction and he was angry he had to teach them something they should have learned in elementary school before he could even start in on high school level math. He couldn’t believe they had made it to 9th grade without this knowledge, and felt they shouldn’t have.

    The dumbing down of our educational systems, the dumbing down of America started decades ago. 1971 was the first year of integration with black students in south Florida. Coincidence you think? I think not.

  14. Anonymous says:

    Hey Shureesh if Indians routinely outachieve Whites, why do you keep sending your kids here to be educated by Whites, instead of Indians in India?

  15. Quality Not Equality says:

    Quality and equality are incompatible. By obsessing with the second goal, the American educational system has damaged the first one. We see this all the time with the myriads of “news” articles bemoaning the persistent “racial achievement gap” that exists in school districts all across America.

    Imagine what would happen if we spent our resources helping those students who are truly talented to maximize their potential, rather than engaging in a quixotic attempt to help the others achieve what they cannot achieve. The mind boggles.

  16. Jim says:

    The paradox is that in the US, a capitalist “meritocracy”, we put most of our emphasis on (and resources towards) our worst students. In China, a communist country, they don’t single out poorly performing students for special treatment…it’s sink or swim – there’s a high level of educational competitiveness over there.

  17. neanderthalDNA says:

    It was so bad, I had to triage my classes. Group one, gonna be ok, especially if i can get them away from group three. God forbid we separate them from group TWO, so they can learn even faster! At least they tend to teach themselves, are intrinsically motivated, and in the worst schools are impressive individuals.

    But not immune to prolonged attacks of profound stupidity and pathos…

    Then there was group two – the average. Potential to some point. Maybe need to grow up. I had to teach them unless they were really interested or had good families (K style upbringing). As in triage, they needed attention, because they could be saved. No guarantee, especially if place in the infectious radius of group THREE…

    Group three were the old yellers of ejumuhkayshun. Neither I nor the district, nor the state, nor the COUNTRY had nor has the resources to ejumucate group three, much less to deal with all the group twos and maybe even group ones who may succumb or become infected by them to TRY to save one group three’er.

    Some group three’ers miraculously pull through, sure. it happens. PLENTY of group two’ers get sucked down – they are the most vulnerable.

    The task the dippy libbers of education have assigned themselves (that which the lame-o-cons have snickeringly endorsed under No Child silliness – hmmm, maybe not so lame – let dippy libs hang selves on own ideology…)


  18. the Guru says:

    They can rename all they want but it still doesn’t improve out comes only worsens it since it promotes breeding lower inteligencia or whatever you want to call it.I am sick and tired of wasting my money on these people.

  19. Former Public Schoolteacher says:

    YES, YES, and YES!!! This was one of us teachers’ biggest concerns with NCLB — bright and gifted kids were left on their own for most of the time. I had one kid who was so bright she would finish her work in about 5 minutes, and then spend the rest of the time reading her King James Bible – the OLD King James, not the new one. She was 9 years old, in the 4th grade. There was no time to work with her or with the couple of other bright kids in that class. NCLB is test-heavy, meaning the teacher has to test kids INDIVIDUALLY on every single story they read in English class, and the kids had “seatwork” while that was being done. It was a horrible and unjust system. That’s why I advocate home schooling today.

  20. ice says:

    “Are We Leaving Gifted Students Behind?”

    Of course not. Just ask some airhead from academia or the MSM or Hollywood and they’ll tell you that as soon as the oppression, racism and systemic bias is brought under control blacks will easily step into all the professional and scientific slots and excel.

    So “no,” we aren’t leaving gifted students behind. We are creating them. They’ll replace all the whites who achieved what they did, because the system is weighted in their favor.

  21. Anonymous says:

    To Sureesh ‘.. though Asians only make up 10 percent of the U.S. they would make up over 20 percent of “gifted kids”.’ Asian

    American is just 5 percent of the U.S. population. You dont help your point by making the Asian population larger than it is. As a matter of fact, Quick Facts as the Asian population at 4.8 percent(in 2010).

  22. Anonymous says:

    neanderthalDNA ‘Maybe THIS duckspeak will get them little black kids achieving the way your broken ideology says they should!’

    Though eight percent of white American students achieved score at the advanced level in math , in places such as West Verginia(94.5 percent white), Wyoming(91 percent white) , Serbia and Bulgaria only 2 to 3 percent of students reached this level. Even in Maine and North Dakota only 4 percent of students were at the advanced level.

  23. Anonymous says:

    Ref, post #09

    Re many teachers not being bright: contemporary Internet options and other technology that makes possible interactive communication and video communication, etc, across great distances, ought to negate a common enough problem before, say,

    1995, of somewhat mediocre teachers of gifted ed trying to evolve individual projects for the kids that were much brighter than they. Of course, the revolutions and synergies in technology, if not subject to political censorship, create great gifted education opportunities betweeen/among/ genuinely gifted youth without regard to school enrollment, teachers, etc. In this respect, one can ponder the great revolution of our time in understanding biological and evolutionary bases of human differences. There isn’t much I can see to stop gifted high school students quite on their own in designing and carrying out, with online supervision and feedback, experiments on breeding and “testing” maze-smart and maze-dull mice; even in Candid-Camera-like, real-life situational tests of adaptive intelligence, video taped (with deletion of specific identifying facial and body features ), etc. At this moment, I can’t help wondering what reliable estimates exist as to the incidence of gifted education choosing home schooling out of respect to an upclose sense that, on balance, home schooling facilitates their giftedness better than public schooling usually does??

  24. Anonymous says:

    My very gifted grandson, his parents separated when he was two. His mother goes on vacation without him, his Dad’s girlfriend, to which the child was very attached, is leaving.

    He goes to a school for gifted children. I asked him what he recently learned in history, since this family has a strong affinity to history, and he told me he learned about a journalist. Knock me over with a spaghetti, I can’t remember her name, but she is a black woman, and she gave the commencement address at a college. There have been thousands of journalists, and since they found a black one, my grandson has to learn about her in history.

    Aside from that, he spends a lot of time helping kids that are not as smart as he is. His mother has the say so, you know how it is in this country, Sureesh, no way to home school the kid.

    I am of the persuasion, that American kids from an era when they had to walk to school and do chores beforehand, would have run circles around you and your kids. Playing computer games, messed up families, TV. Tell me about Asian kids, pressure from the parents, study, study, study. I would bet dollars to doughnuts that white kids on average study not half as much as an Asian kid.

  25. Anonymous says:

    What is missing from all the comments is that the Asian children are from the brightest and most industrious families in their home countries. If only the best and brightest were chosen from American children to make the comparison then it would not be so favorable a showing for “high Asian intelligence”.

    I routinely impress Asians as very smart when I am in Asia and am just being a tourist.

    Missing from the article and comments is also that teachers and students also verbally attack, ridicule and sometimes physically assault the brightest students. The same teachers and students also claim that they are great friends of those they attack. I have a friend whose son was attacked and has broken bones because he got a higher grade than anyone else in his 4th grade class in math. Until the lawyers are finished that is all I can tell you.

    I was personally attacked many times in school for being smarter than the attacking students. I have physical injuries that will remain all my life from 2 of the attacks

  26. Anonymous says:

    Response to poster number 23–yes, the Internet has many opportunities for gifted children, but…there are so many barriers to them getting access–as you mentioned. One important thing about any education is that every moment is crammed full with “activities”–“Teach from bell to bell…” which, for a lot of teachers means, “Don’t shut up.” Children–all children, but especially the gifted population–need time to reflect, to think.

    I designed my own “gifted” program when I was in high school elebendy-mumble years ago, and “most” of it was off-campus. My program involved the help of some very gifted librarians in the city system, as well as musicians in the municipal symphony and some artists who were willing to share. So, yes, I taught myself with outside resources, because school was awful. It can be done if children are willing and able to take matters in their hands, and they have the support of parental units. Otherwise, it gets dicey, unless they are emancipated youth.

  27. Anonymous says:

    There’s what the law says and what policy says. Followed in every jot and tittle. And then when nobody is looking, there’s the extra challenge slipped to those students that can take it and not to those who can’t. Having to work around the lack of challenge to the boys and girls who will run society is an unfortunate situation but there are opportunities to do so. Do-gooders undo my work as well, fostering sloth and dependency, but I do what I can and have some success.

    In a better world I’d be more specific and sign on to a forum for AmRen educators. In this world no such thing exists.

  28. New York Observer says:

    6 — Utah Observer wrote:

    “Interesting article my son is 4 on both sides of our family there are people of high intelligence.”


    Yeah sure! Your brilliant son was reading at two, and at four has already mastered three languages.

    Well, I don’t believe you. Your very first, uh, ‘sentence’ (quoted above) is testimony to your intellectual competence.

  29. Alexandra says:

    I have to throw in something here: My son is very bright, but due to a developmental delay it’s not immediately apparent. You can have geniuses who are in special ed.

    Not all children in special ed are “dim.” They may have something wrong with their “wiring” so to speak.

  30. ghw says:

    23 — Anonymous wrote at 1:50 PM on September 2:

    More wisdom from Anonymous (in part):

    Wow! What do these garbled, unintelligible “sentences” actually say? Can anyone figure out this bombastic gobbledygook from someone who presumes to advise us on intelligence?

    “Re many teachers not being bright: contemporary Internet options and other technology that makes possible interactive communication and video communication, etc, across great distances, ought to negate a common enough problem before, say, 1995, of somewhat mediocre teachers of gifted ed trying to evolve individual projects for the kids that were much brighter than they.”

    Another sentence:

    “There isn’t much I can see to stop gifted high school students quite on their own in designing and carrying out, with online supervision and feedback, experiments on breeding and “testing” maze-smart and maze-dull mice; even in Candid-Camera-like, real-life situational tests of adaptive intelligence, video taped (with deletion of specific identifying facial and body features ), etc.”

    All this, and more, crammed within a single run-on paragraph!

  31. Anonymous says:

    Ref. post #30

    It’s a buffet here. If you don’t like, don’t chew on it–especially with an open mouth. OK?

  32. Anonymous says:

    Post #29. Quite right. In some occasional instances in which a handicap overlay exists ,full underlying basic ability is manifested on an individually administered IQ test only here or there among the range of several subtests given and tallied up. IN such fairly rare instances, the psychologist’s report of the testing ought to note such indications. Applicable federal law affords parental access to such reports in public schools.

  33. Anonymous says:

    Comments here by teachers and others who’ve “been there, seen that” are really pretty convincing. Abler students also speak

    well to the actual realities.

    One matter that perhaps in the atmosphere of our times has not been studied (or at least not academically published) may be just

    the correlations mere raw demographic data can provide about this neglect of gifted students/ abler students. In school buildings (attendance centers ) having more than 25% Black enrollment, the incidence of complaints carried home by abler students seems much higher–but hopefully this is not so much in evidence in racially mixed student bodies in higher SES areas?

  34. Disgruntled College Student says:

    To be blunt, just being in a school with a high percentage of blacks is demoralizing. You can throw any pretense of civility out the window. If its a college, you can’t leave anything in your car, the school can’t/won’t have any nice comfort things (like a microwave anywhere close to where you could actually use it), or any sense of community (friendly gatherings on campus due to fear of crime), it makes any part of dealing with the administration tiresome (because dealing with blacks all day makes them unpleasant, its just reality), and eventually this filters down into the actual academics of the school (e.g. invariably this leads to group work where you get stuck with blacks in your group who wont pull their own weight, and are unpleasant to deal with). There are other effects such as a hypersensitivity to racial issues that make the environment tend to suck. Even the average student is pulled down by it, and the kinds of classes that a gifted student would be interested in simply disappear as this isn’t the client base of the school.

    There are plenty of other things that come with it, and plenty of blame to go around such as: outcome based education policies, but the simple truth is – even without those changes that inevitably happen when blacks achieve higher numbers in a school, the environment is made miserable by their presence, and behaviors alone.

    My former university had to get rid of vending machines because a group of blacks were stuffing their feces into them. For reasons that still confound me, blacks have to dump all over everything in their environment.

  35. Anonymous says:

    “My former university had to get rid of vending machines because a group of blacks were stuffing their feces into them. For reasons that still confound me, blacks have to dump all over everything in their environment.”

    How interesting! And very true. I won’t go into it deeply, because it is such an awkward subject. But that issue has come up in my place of employment also. In fact, several places. And various times.

    There seems to be a mobid fascination with blacks about that topic. Their preoccupation with that ought be a subject for study by psychologists. But again, it is too awkward a subject. And “racist” too. So everywhere it is politely ignored.

  36. Anonymous says:

    Ref. 34

    To a more muted extent, some of this same thing can be found

    when comparing very very disadvantaged whites with average whites.

    Some of the communities in Appalachia and in the Ozarks used to

    have some of the same “get by” “low time preference” “grab and

    discard” appearances as what you get at here. There is a difference in degree and tone, however, with the ghetto population

    and it comes off as more a difference in kind than in degree.

  37. Anonymous says:

    Sureesh: Whose flag was planted on the Moon? India? China? Korea? No, the United States flag, back when the US was 85% White.

    You Orientals have yet to get there. Bring our Astronauts two Number 3s, four Number 5s, with rice, and six egg roles, on your way up.

  38. Anonymous says:

    Disgruntled College Student #34: I would like to suggest that you look into attending Patrick Henry College.

    How anyone can learn in the environment you are in is beyond me.

    We had Blacks and other Minorities when I went to College, but thankfully, things were not that bad or out-of-control as they are now. And it wasn’t tolerated then, as it is now.

    I am interested to know if you have a “Youth for Western Civilization” Club on your Campus? If yes, please consider joining it. If not, please invite this defender of White Civilization onto your Campus, to form a Chapter.

  39. Josh Harlan says:

    Hey Shureesh if Indians routinely outachieve Whites, why do you keep sending your kids here to be educated by Whites, instead of Indians in India?


    We get the very top cream of Indian society and are supposed to compare it to ALL American society. Sureesh, exactly how many people in India have toilets? India, the very epitome of the third world.

  40. Sincerely Concerned says:

    My parents moved my sister and me out of Atlanta and into a rural North Georgia town during the late-70s white flight. I joined a school that had actually just opened its doors in 1977 and we were the first-ever students. I noticed right away that we were placed in classes according to our performance from our previous years of school (for those of us in the 2nd to 8th grades). Remedial learners were in one homeroom, kids averaging Cs in another, kids who earned Bs averages in another, and the A-students in yet another. We ALL improved to the point of the entire school winning scholastic awards, not to mention excelling in other areas such as art, writing, and sports. The school was rural, had very, very little tax money, and was not technically racially diverse as there were few minorities of any kind in this rural area. This article reminds me of the film “Teachers” with Nick Nolte and JoBeth Williams. In the film, the school got so bad that the teachers refused to teach and basically shut the school down because they were tired of trying to discipline students who were not there to learn. Sometimes I wish we could go back to segregation: not of races, but of learners.

  41. C says:

    A little late, but just reading this topic. My son is very advanced. He read at age 3, was reading chapter books and doing addition and subtraction before he went to kindergarten, and at 5 could tell you all about the Colonies and the Revolutionary War.

    We made the mistake of putting him in a “good” school system with a “strong” G/T program. What a joke. All he got there was busywork… lots of projects that didn’t advance or challenge him at all. I saw his love of learning plummet. He had a few good teachers, but they can’t make up for disruptive classmates and a wholly broken system.

    This year, for 3rd grade, we’ve started homeschooling. That “spark” he had for learning is back. And I don’t have to deal with all the red tape of public schools, and put up with all the hoops we had to jump through to make sure he learned anything at all.

    I have my son back and I’m now a huge advocate of homeschooling. If you can teach your kids yourself, it’s really the best option.