The Institute for Educational Advancement (IEA) is deeply saddened by the most recent examples of the horrific injustice that has plagued our nation’s Black community for far too long. We join communities around the world that are banding together to mourn and work towards social justice. We share in the grief and pain caused by these tragedies, yet we are hopeful that this outcry against racism and violence will result in real change. 
 
IEA is committed to being part of the solution. We are listening, asking questions, learning and taking action. IEA serves children of all ages and backgrounds; we understand that the dialogue about inequality and violence will look different in each family.  These conversations are important for us all.  Our children are watching us – they want to help us create a more just and civil society that embraces equality and condemns racism. As an organization, IEA celebrates differences. We teach tolerance, respect and acceptance for all, regardless of race, religion, sexual orientation or background. We hope to inspire change in our nation by modeling integrity, respect and understanding. IEA strives to offer a welcoming space for conversation and healing, a space where uniqueness is honored, and discrimination and violence are never tolerated. Yet we know we can do more.
 
We invite our entire community to the conversation and hope that you will dialogue with us by sending your feedback and suggestions. IEA is taking the following actions:

• We are hosting a Spyglass workshop: “Digital Civics: Changemakers of Tomorrow” as a complimentary offering.
• We are expanding our work to diversify IEA’s community with the help of partner organizations.
• We are gathering and disseminating resources for IEA’s community.
• We are advancing our Public Policy efforts to ensure gifted youth from all backgrounds are identified and served.
• We encourage our constituency to use their voice to vote.

We have gathered a collection of resources that may be of assistance, and we will continue to update this list on IEA’s blog.  Please continue to share articles, books, podcasts or videos that have been helpful for your family!
 
IEA is committed to listening to your voices, and we will work together to create social justice. Thank you for allowing IEA to be a part of your lives.
 
In Solidarity,
 
Elizabeth D. Jones
IEA President
 

RESOURCES

This section will be updated regularly as we receive feedback and resource suggestions from the IEA community. 

Books about Racism:

• NY Times: List of Kids Books on Racism
• Embrace.org: Where to Find Diverse Children Books
• Charis Books and More: Books that Teach White Children and Teens How to Undo Racism and White Surpremecy

Videos

• CNN/Sesame Street racism town hall
• Story Pirates: Black Lives Matter

Articles

• • Your Kids Aren’t Too Young to Talk About Race: Resource Roundup
  • Q/A from NPR: Q&A: How To Talk To Kids About Black Lives And Police Violence
  • Black Lives Matter. Black Minds Matter, Too: The Case For Prioritizing Equity In Gifted Education As An Urgent Racial Justice Issue
  • NY Times: I was a Low Income College. Classes Weren’t the Heard Part
  • NAGC Blog: Black Lives Matter in Gifted Programs

As a part of IEA’s effort to advance the cause of gifted students nationwide, IEA commissioned the first ever national survey assessing the American public’s views on gifted education. The summary covers the results of a national survey, completed in 2016, that sought to understand the public’s perception of gifted students in the United States. This poll was designed in collaboration with leaders in the field of gifted education, including the National Association for Gifted Children, and conducted by Benenson Strategy Group and The Winston Group.

“We are seeing overwhelming support for funding and resources to ensure that our brightest students’ minds are nurtured and supported, which hasn’t always been the case in the past,” said Elizabeth D. Jones, President & Co-Founder of IEA. “As a community, we are committed to advocating for what the public wants: helping our highest potential students succeed.”

The poll report contains helpful information about the state of gifted education in the U.S. and details recommendations for how to communicate about gifted students and advocate for this cause. The goal of this document is to provide a tool for the gifted community, families, teachers and professionals alike to use when advocating for these unique learners.

The poll report was written by Jones and Dr. Shelagh A. Gallagher. The authors will be hosting a webinar presenting the results and answering viewer questions on March 26th at 11 a.m. PST/2 p.m. EST. The webinar is free and open to the public.

Additional contributors include: Alan Arkotov of University of Southern California, Dr. Jim Delisle, René Islas formerly of National Association for Gifted Children, Michael Petrilli & Chester Finn of Thomas B. Fordham Institute, Ann Smith of Gifted Support Center, Dr. Amy Shelton of Johns Hopkins Center for Talented Youth and Adam Umhoefer of American Foundation for Equal Rights.

The release of the full results was preceded by a poll summary, Public Attitudes Towards Gifted Education, released in August 2018. This document contains highlights from the results of the poll.

Read the full report.

For more information about IEA’s policy initiatives or any of IEA’s other programs and services, visit our Advocacy page. 

As a part of IEA’s effort to advance the cause of gifted students nationwide, IEA commissioned the first ever national survey assessing the American public’s views on gifted education. Linked below you will find a summary of the national survey, completed in 2016, that sought to understand the public’s perception of gifted students in the United States. This poll was designed in collaboration with leaders in the field of gifted education, including the National Association for Gifted Children, and conducted by Beneson Strategy Group and The Winston Group.

The summary contains helpful information about the state of gifted education in the U.S. and details recommendations for how to communicate about gifted students and advocate for this cause. Our hope is that this document would be a tool for the gifted community, families, teachers, and professionals alike to use when advocating for these unique learners.

Read the Poll Summary

Thank you to Alan Arkotov of University of Southern California, Dr. Jim Delisle, Dr. Shelagh A. Gallagher, René Islas of National Association for Gifted Children, Michael Petrilli and Chester Finn of Thomas B. Fordham Institute, Ann Smith of Gifted Support Center, Dr. Amy Shelton of Johns Hopkins Center for Talented Youth and Adam Umhoefer of American Foundation for Equal Rights for their assistance and support.

How can you use this information to advocate for gifted learners in your state? Share your ideas below!

The poll, conducted by Benenson Strategy Group and The Winston Group, found that 64% of Democrats, 67% of Independents, 61% of Republicans, and 62% of Trump voters say federal funding for gifted students needs to be increased.  Only 4% of all voters polled said funding needs to be cut, and 32% said funding should be kept as is. Similarly, 63% say state funding needs to be increased.  The poll is the first-ever comprehensive survey of voters on the subject of gifted learners.

“When it comes to America’s future, it is clear that progressives, conservatives, and everyone in between want the same thing – support for our highest potential learners so that our country remains an economic power in the 21st century,” said Elizabeth D. Jones, President & Co-Founder of IEA.  “We are seeing overwhelming support for funding and resources to ensure that our brightest students’ minds are nurtured and supported, which hasn’t always been the case in the past.  As a community, we are committed to advocating for what the public wants: helping our highest potential students succeed.”

Despite the highly charged politics of the day, the poll finds bipartisan agreement on a variety of questions including improving the training of teachers on how to identify and serve gifted students, and increasing supports for gifted students from underserved communities that have historically been under-represented in such programs.  Key findings include:

-64% say federal funding for gifted students needs to be increased, while only 4% say it needs to be cut and 32% say kept as is.

– Similarly, 63% say state funding needs to be increased.

-64% of Democrats, 67% of Independents, 61% of Republicans, and 62% of Trump voters say federal funding for gifted students needs to be increased.

-Even in the face of a strong opposition attack, nearly 7-in-10 voters side with the idea that investing in gifted students is critical to America’s future.

– Just 31% agree with: Spending federal dollars on programs for gifted kids sounds great, but the country just can’t afford it. Every year it seems the federal deficit grows larger and America’s debt rises. With limitless funds it would be great to spend more on gifted kids – and all kids – but that’s just not the world we live in. For gifted programs to be funded, other programs would need to be cut, and that’s not a sacrifice we should make.

– While 69% agree with: America’s success in the 21st century relies on our commitment to the next generation. Countries like China, Singapore and India are investing in their gifted students, while the U.S. provides almost no federal funding for these programs in our schools. If America wants to remain competitive in the 21st century, we need to invest in the leaders and innovators of the future. Investing in gifted kids is investing in America’s continued prosperity.

-Voters overwhelmingly support specific policy proposals to help gifted children, with almost no partisan distinctions.  Policies include improved funding to help train teachers who identify and serve gifted children (90%); improved funding to help train teachers who are educating gifted children (89%); requiring that any teacher who serves gifted children receive special training (86%) and providing additional funding to schools in underserved communities specifically to support programs for gifted students (86%)

Of students who dropped out of high school, 88% had passing grades but left due to boredom.  Among the leading causes for dropping out include feeling unchallenged, unmotivated or bored. Gifted students know up to 50% of the year’s curriculum before the school year begins, which could explain the dropout correlation. There are between 3 and 5 million gifted students in the United States, and most receive the majority of their education in a regular classroom with teachers who have not been trained to teach them — as only 1% of the education budget is spent on serving gifted children. 82% of underachieving gifted students reversed their underachievement when they had opportunities for strength-based gifted programming.  Programming for gifted students is made at the state and local level.

“We must make sure all gifted children have access to the services and supports they need to thrive,” said M. René Islas, executive director of the National Association for Gifted Children.  “The IEA poll makes clear that with increased understanding about the nature and needs of these children, Americans support programs and practices that will help all gifted and talented children flourish.”

The Institute for Educational Advancement and the National Association for Gifted Children are working with leaders in the fields of business, education, and gifted youth to ensure that the federal government creates an infrastructure dedicated to the intellectual, creative and personal growth in the nation’s gifted and high potential youth so the U.S. can continue to be leaders in the global world.

METHODOLOGY

Benenson Strategy Group and The Winston Group conducted 1414 online interviews from December 19, 2016-January 6, 2017 with registered voters nationwide, including oversamples of: 150 Opinion Elites, 150 Parents, 150 Hispanics, and 150 African Americans. At the 95% confidence level, the margin of error for the entire sample is ± 2.51%. It is ±6.21% among Opinion Elites, ±3.73% among Parents, ±6.03% among African Americans, ± 5.81% among Hispanics, and higher among subgroups. Due to rounding, some percentages may not add up to 100%. Note that the “Parents With Gifted Child” group highlighted throughout the deck includes any member of the population identifying as having a gifted kid, regardless of that child’s age.

To learn more about IEA’s advocacy efforts, visit our Advocacy page.

This post was originally published by the National Association for Gifted Children.

Lisa is the mother of 3 gifted children and lives outside of San Francisco.

It’s the only fun part of the college application process: the college trip. It’s the chance for your child to dream before the harsh realities of test scores, class rank and GPAs hit. Best of all, parents are active participants. We get to be accomplices to the dream worlds our children are imagining.

Three years ago, I eagerly anticipated bonding with my oldest son on our whirlwind tour of 6 colleges in the east and one in the Midwest. I memorialized the trip with pictures of him scraping the snow off the windshield of our rented car, waking up with bed head and sampling cannoli in Boston. He was not amused. The defining moment of our trip happened during dinner midway into the week.

“I haven’t seen anyone in so long,” he said.

I not only wasn’t bonding with him, I wasn’t even someone.

I returned from the trip with a more realistic understanding of my place in his world. I could be the travel agent, chauffeur and advisor, but I did not have a place in his dreams. The trip was his opportunity to imagine a life without me. He had already gotten a head start imagining that world.

I tried to apply the lessons I learned from my oldest son to my middle son’s college trip. We would see one school a day (with the exception of a quick trip to New York City) and travel solely by public transportation. The pace and mode of transportation would reduce my stress and allow each of us to immerse ourselves in the experience of looking for a college – separately. For my son, that meant plugging himself into the sounds of Ingrid Michelson and Idina Menzel. For me, it was flipping the pages of The Gatekeepers: Inside the Admissions Process of a Premier College.

My son let me set the itinerary. We could only visit 6 or 7 schools, so I made the decision to tour schools of varying size located in suburban, urban and big city locations. This would allow me to gauge his interest in particular types of schools. One of the things they had in common is that they all had strong programs in his areas of interest: International Relations, Politics, Philosophy, Economics, Public Policy and Government. The other thing they had in common is that they are all spectacularly hard to get into. That last part wasn’t one of my criteria; it just turned out that way. Or, more accurately, I didn’t make an effort to balance safety, target and reach schools.

I was breaking the first rule of the college application process: manage your child’s expectations.

I wasn’t trying to communicate an unreasonably high level of expectations to my son, although it could certainly be seen that way. I was curious. Some group of researchers decided that these were the best schools in the country and lots of students appeared to agree with this conclusion. How else do you get such low acceptance rates? Besides, isn’t this an area where a gifted kid can dream big? After my husband and I had spent years finding outlets for his passions, was this really the time to tell our son that the admission odds are set against him and he should be more realistic? Without visiting these schools, they would just be names, spoken with reverence by his friends and their parents. He would not know if the fuss was justified until he experienced these mythical institutions, however superficially.

Luckily, the idea of attending an Ivy League college had already lost some of its luster by the time we left for the East Coast. My son had fallen in love two weeks earlier. The object of his affection is a liberal arts college in Southern California. The town, the campus, the classes and the flip flop wearing student body spoke to him. He now had the gold standard against which all other schools would be compared.

If my son felt pressured by my itinerary, he didn’t complain. In fact, he said that he would have been disappointed had I not taken him to these highly selective schools. He was not ready to inventory his shortcomings. He still wanted the chance to dream. So, bring it on Harvard. Let’s see if the tingly excitement brought on by an Ivy League name can compare to the warmth generated by the Southern California sun.

See Part II: A 16 Year Old’s Guide to Colleges

Like this post? Please share!