but I taught GATE (gifted and talented) and I know what the tests in CA look like since we had to take them as part of our GATE training. It is basically an IQ test and has no words/language, only a series of patterns and was 100% visual. Only the 3rd and 5th Graders were tested. I don't see how NY can say that the tests aren't appropriate for all students. A 3rd Grade teacher told me that she was monitoring the 3rd Graders as the whole grade was tested at the same time and she told me that the student who got the highest score was not Black, White, Latino or Asian. He was from India and he was the last one to complete the test. He studied the patterns by turning the paper all over and studying it from different perspectives in order to complete the next pattern.

Gifted students have special needs. Some also have other special needs such as ADD/ADHD along with high or low academic scores.

Our school's GATE classes were for both students who performed well on the GATE test as well as students who had performed well in class work and on classroom tests but did not do well on the GATE test. Some students have testing anxiety and that is taken into consideration.

The OLSAT is similar to the annual standardized achievement tests that all students take. If language is involved in the instructions the students take the test in their Home Language so that language isn't am issue.

The NNAT is tricky, it starts off easy but gets very difficult quickly.

I have mixed feelings about ending it.

It was called the IGC program, intellectually gifted children, when I attended
I lived in the top district (#22) in Brooklyn at the time, we had 5 classes per grade, and 2 were IGC. (We used to compete, theorize and suspect there was an IGC 1 and 2, with 1 being even smarter than 2, usually based on who the teacher was...the better teacher was teaching the smartest kids.) We were mostly white, of Italian or Jewish or Irish descent. I had a Turkish friend and a black friend, and friends who weren't part of the in crowd. There were several black kids who got bussed in because they'd tested well and this program wasn't available in their local school. I usually sat with them, towards the back of the classroom.

Testing throughout our years in school might remove or add kids, but mostly it was a core group between 2 classes. We all had the opportunity to attend the SP (special program) in junior high. The 2 yr SP was accelerated, doing grades 7, 8 & 9 in 2 years; the 3 yr offered enrichment with enhanced classes. Most of us went on to earn a regent's diploma at one of 3 local high schools in the district, and many continued on to top colleges and substantial careers. I developed no lasting relationships with any of my childhood classmates. I ended up graduating high school at 16 and college just before I turned 20. Then I burned out in graduate school trying to get my PhD by 24. I think my early education experiences set me up for that, and it didn't work for me, although I probably had a bit more of a dysfunctional family life than many of my classmates.

In the IGC I remember feeling overwhelmed by the expectations and the reality of being with other smart kids, not feeling smart enough, feeling insecure, dysfunctional, at times competitive and always pressured to perform well. I also remember loving the enhanced education. Thinking about that now I see both sides.

It was great to get the enriched education, and to be with other kids who stimulated and challenged each other. But the competitive nature in that environment can be harmful. I remember, as a smart kid, being in situations with kids who weren't as smart who accused me of showing off because I knew an answer or asked a question. I played dumb sometimes because kids felt threatened or didn't understand I wasn't showing off when I was being myself. And I actually cheated to lose, after a friend told me she didn't want to play games with me because I always won and made her feel bad. I convinced her to play again and didn't want her to feel bad and figured if I let her win she'd play with me again. I was 12.

The program was meant to offer talented children a higher level of education, and a core group.
All children can benefit from a higher level, they rise to expectations. But smart kids can also fall to lower standards and performance to fit in and not stand out. And they can get board and into trouble if not stimulated enough. I speak from experience.

I hope these changes to NYC education will be good for the students.

option after us.