Why labeling students as "gifted" isn't working

When Ava Echard was 5 years old, she took a test that placed her in a gifted and talented program. Participating in this program offered Ava many exciting opportunities, but it also made her wonder: what made her so "special," and why was this specialness determined at such an early age? Now in high school, Ava's questioning whether her "gifted and talented" label had more to do with her advantageous upbringing than with her innate abilities. In this comprehensive Talk, Ava explains why schools should consider the relationship between nature and nurture, and focus more on celebrating the many different kinds of intelligence that exist among students.

When I was 5 years old,

I was placed in a small room and
given a series of puzzles to solve.

Both the administrator and my parents
assured me it was only for fun

and meant absolutely nothing;

but my parents privately suspected,
even hoped, that I'd do well,

knowing the advantages doing well
on the test could offer me.

I only vaguely understood what a
test was at that point,

and much less understood the way
those sentences, shapes and numbers

would pave the course of my life.

8 years later, a small group of kids
gathered around a table,

pulled out of class while the other
kids remained in class,

only vaguely aware of our meeting.

Ever since we had done well on that test,
we'd been meeting a couple times a week.

Many schools have this type
of programming,

but mine calls it Gifted and
Talented Education,

a term which means we did well on a test
and are considered above our age level.

But what does that even mean?

It sounds a bit like you've been
given a present,

and that that present is just your
own extra-special brain.

On this day, though, I was
more apprehensive—

the unit we were about to embark on was
writing our own TED-Ed Talks,

and I had decided to write mine

about the problems with our tight-knit
unit, or “the gifted group."

I braced myself for backlash.

However, when I rose and read
my argument to the group,

I noticed eyes light up and
sudden animation.

We shared stories about how being
placed into the gifted program

had altered the course of our lives.

About how we were placed into
the “smart kid” group,

forced together socially,
watched for every mistake,

and forced to live up to
the label “gifted”

even thought we didn’t feel all that
different from anyone else.

About how the expectations placed
on us at a young age led to anxiety

and perfectionism throughout our life.

About how every failure felt bigger

because we were supposed to
be innately special.

And we’re supposed to be the
winners in gifted education.

According to the National Association
for Gifted Children,

3 to 5 million students are placed
into gifted education.

I was placed into this system
in kindergarten,

when I went through that IQ test.

But why me?

It turns out it may have had
less to do with me

and more to do with the
circumstances of my life.

I had involved parents who fed me well,
made sure I had proper medical care,

made sure I lived in a good neighborhood
and read to me often.

And so by kindergarten,
I was ahead of the curve.

But what about kids who didn't
have parents like mine?

What about kids whose circumstances
are much different than mine?

It turns out that race and income
level strongly impact

whether or not a child ends up
in gifted education.

Among low-income households, only
10% of African-American students

and 14% of Latinx students can read
proficiently by the 3rd grade.

Even adjusting for income,

only 14% of African-Americans students
and 58% of white students

can read proficiently by 3rd grade.

It is during this time that kids are
sorted into gifted education,

a time when a kid’s innate ability
determines their opportunities

for the rest of their lives.

But what if this ability that
is supposedly innate

has more to do with the circumstances
of their lives?

It is because of this that those
who start behind, stay behind.

It turns out that little kindergarten me

may not have been more
special than my peers.

I was brought up in a positive
environment, I was white,

I was taught to read at home.

But what if I did well within the system

because my parents developed
higher expectations for me

and gave me the tools to meet them?

The gifted program operates on
the idea that intelligence is fixed.

About 6% of all public-school students
are sorted into this system.

But intelligence contracts and expands

based on the challenges that
we seek for ourselves.

Intelligence manifests
itself in many forms.

Intelligence can be quiet.

Often, our emphasis on intelligence
overlooks many other important traits:

curiosity, creativity, perseverance.

And finally, being placed into
a box labeled gifted

results in a loss of faith in
our ability to learn,

and ultimately, to shape our lives.

So how can we evolve our education
system to stimulate all students,

without separating them based on
our limited definition of intelligence?

We can start by trusting students
with individual large-scale projects

in class based on their interests,

and celebrate interests that don’t align
with an advanced curriculum.

We can stop putting kids into gifted
programs in early elementary school years,

when ability is most vulnerable to
differences in income and environment.

We can put money into
after-school programs

that explore real world applications
and advanced topics.

Mostly, we can give kids time
and space to explore.

And to the parents and teachers—

what if we made it your role to
foster curiosity, empathy and creativity

instead of just identifying
kids as gifted?

What if we showed kids how they can
grow instead of telling them who they are?

What if instead of just identifying gifted
kids, we made room for all types of kids.

The kids who are struggling
with their identity,

the kids who challenge our standards,
the creative kids, the passionate kids—

and show them how they, with their gifts,
can help shape our world, too.

Thank you.