Over-achievers

I leave the real eduspeak to the professionals. People who actually care about acronyms and the mumbo-jumbo that goes with education. The policy analysis you can get at Eduwonk or in your local paper if you need it. No one really wants to hear me "debate" the finer points of edu policy. I speak to something that constantly bothers me. We all do it and try to find ways around it because really no one likes to be labeled. Students are "low," "under-achievers," "problems," "ELLs" (said typically with a negative tone or meaning...such as, "if we didn't have so many English language learners...") and my personal favorite "GATE." Okay first of all, the students aren't GATE kids. GATE is the program that is offered to students who are considered gifted and talented. However, just because a child is an "over-achiever," does not mean s/he is also gifted, or vice-versa under-achiever=not gifted. Regardless, I detest these friggin' designations. All of my students are gifted, so there. All of them deserve enrichment activities that challenge them and motivate them. Why does Johnny-low-achiever or Susy-problem-kid get dumped in the doesn't deserve art, music, science club, bin?!? I would really like teachers to be more careful with their language. Children ARE gifted. So the question is, are we finding ways to engage that potential or merely assuming that all these poorly labeled students aren't cutting it because they lack a, b, and c. I am of the camp that likes to assume we fail our "struggling" students when we don't consider other learning modalities. We definitely do a lot to support those same "struggling" students, but I often look around and see the same types of activities after school as they are being forced to do during school that didn't seem to meet their learning needs then. And the funny thing is, the reality of it doesn't actually set in until after they leave the elementary grades and get into junior high and high school. Because in first grade they can be pretty motivated by the whole learning for learnings sake thing. I also believe that children are motivated to learn when they find value and purpose in what they are doing. I sure don't spend time doing discreet math problems, because I have no head or use for them. Doesn't mean I don't spend hours reading about other stuff I enjoy. I find purpose in the learning I do as an adult. Ahh, time for track practice. It will give me more time to rant and rave in my head as I loaf 1200m with a busted foot. (I kicked a table by accident today - ouch!)