As an advocate of gifted education, I must address some of the concepts in yeahnook's comment.

The idea that gifted children cannot be identified until third grade is a myth. Although there are many illustrative examples, when a five-year old child is reading dramatically above grade level and is largely self taught, as gifted children do in some cases, the odds of the child being typical are pretty low. Enrolling this type of child in a traditional classroom can do real harm to the child.

Giftedness doesn't happen because of an enriching experience at home. Sure, a child can be hurt by a lack of enrichment and stimulation as a baby and beyond, but an enriching environment, even a super enriching environment does not cause a gifted child.

I don't believe for a minute that a professionally administered test is highly flawed and biased. Yet, to be clear, the average classroom teacher is not a trained psychologist capable of administering a real IQ test. So, the process of selecting children for TAG can be biased. For example, it may be very hard for a dyslexic child to be selected for TAG, even though his/her IQ might be in the gifted range. Dyslexia and other learning disabilities are present in gifted children and can make it more difficult for them to reach their ultimate potential. Leaving them in traditional classrooms is hardly the way to address their challenges – which can be overcome – so they can reach their potential. So, it is fair to say not every gifted child is in TAG and not every TAG child is gifted.

I find the comment suggesting parents will find a test that "shows 130 points or higher" pretty amazing. These professionally administered tests cost a few hundred dollars. My experiences have only introduced me to parents looking for the truth for the betterment of their children, not a special score.

Relevant Links for more information...
http://mackintoshboulder.wordpress.com/
http://www.mackintoshacademy.com

This picture probably tells the story. (Photos are great!) I would be interesting to see an analysis of the relative performance of Pearl Street vs. other areas to confirm the adverse impact of the electric metrics. I wonder if the Parking gods and the Sales Tax gurus can collaborate without establishing a commission or task force that is sure to require staff support, public hearings and newspaper advertisements.

I remember a time, before the new machines were installed, that a Pearl Street merchants' association actually put a quarter in my meter as it expired. They even left a nice note to thank me for shopping on Pearl Street. What a pleasant surprise when I returned with two pairs of shoes which had provided gross profit to the merchant and sales tax receipts. What an impossibility now. See you all in Broomfield.

So in Gunbarrel - near Jay & 75th the coverage is really bad. My neighbor returned an iPhone and dropped AT&T. I can talk on the second floor of my house when I have to. On the other hand, when I had Verizon service I was confident enough to lead conference calls from my office in the basement. The bad coverage continues from my home all the way down Jay Road to the Diagonal Highway and into Boulder. I start to experience reliable calls at Iris and 28th. If I stay on 28th Street to Pearl it seem to be safe. My office on the Pearl Street Mall has good coverage.

It is open enrollment, plain and simple.

That is actually a good question. The recent studies are interesting. I am not convinced focusing on the national average is useful. In Colorado, charter schools do better than traditional schools. CREDO, associated with Stanford University, reports that Colorado is one of five states (in a study of 16 States) with "...significantly higher learning gains for charter school students than would have occurred in traditional schools..."

The conversion comment from the BVSD recommendation body is at best a red herring to inspire fear, uncertainty and doubt in the community and to help protect the entrenched bureaucracy. The founder of the the failed school is not part of the initiative or the steering committee. The failed school is in fact closed and the students have scattered.

What you're describing is asynchrony. It some cases, the weakness falls to the level of a learning disability. This type of student is then categorized as twice exceptional. This is exactly the type of problem public schools are challenged to address.

This is untrue. The administration of the failed school is not connected to this initiative. The admissions process is called open enrollment.

Roloc help me understand the facts that lead you to the conclusion that it does anything but address them?

These children have a tendency to be very complex. Many demonstrate extremes that challenge their parents and their teachers. Not to mention the frustrations this trigger in the child. I wish this issue were as simple as being smarter. It is not.

The blessed child who is simply smarter in every subject and blessed with social intelligence, sports prowess and good looks may be the prom queen, class valedictorian and a Rhodes Scholar probably does not need a gifted school. This is wonderful for this child. Unfortunately, many children are not blessed with this well rounded set of traits. And these other kids need more than a regular school.

A gifted school will not protect them from the diversity that is our world. They will get that experience in Little League, on the swim team, on the soccer team, in the Girl Scouts program, at summer camp, in the neighborhood, in high school, in college, in the workplace.

Are we too stuck in our ways to offer a more supportive setting to some of our K-8 children through our public school system? Some of these kids are born to families that can afford to provide private education and some are not. The equitable solution is to create a charter school that is accessible without tuition payments.