The Problem With Phasing Out Gifted Education

When New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani suggested ending gifted education for young children, the response was instant and intense. His idea to phase out gifted programs until third grade, in the name of equity, sparked a citywide debate that quickly spread far beyond the five boroughs. Parents and educators didn’t just disagree; they were angry, confused, and fearful about what this might mean for their children.

The Washington Post editorial board didn’t mince words. They warned that “politicians tread on perilous ground when their pursuit of equity comes at the cost of children’s opportunities” (The Washington Post Editorial Board, 2025).

At the heart of this debate is a misunderstanding of gifted education. It’s often portrayed as an elite advantage, something reserved for privileged children. But that’s not what it’s suppose to be. Gifted education is a form of special education for students who learn differently. Just as we create individualized plans for children with learning challenges, we should also ensure that advanced learners receive the depth and pace they need to thrive.

Why Gifted Programs Matter

Gifted children aren’t simply “smarter” than their peers. They think differently. They make connections quickly, they crave complexity, and they get restless when lessons move too slowly. when these kids aren’t challenged, the results aren’t pretty. They can lose motivation,act out,or retreat altogether. As Pfeiffer and Petscher (2008) found,gifted students who aren’t stimulated can become bored,anxious, and emotionally withdrawn.

Giftedness also isn’t a prize. It’s a difference.And differences require support. Ending programs for gifted students doesn’t make schools fairer.It just leaves another group of kids without what they need. The real goal, as The Post argued, should be to expand access, not take it away.

The Equity Challenge

There’s no denying that gifted programs have an equity problem. In New York City, as a notable example, Black and Hispanic children make up about 63 percent of kindergartners but only about 16 percent of students in gifted and talented programs (New York City independent Budget Office, 2022).That’s a sign of a system that isn’t identifying talent evenly.

The solution isn’t to scrap these programs altogether.The problem is how we decide who gets identified. Card and Giuliano (2016) found that when schools test all students instead of relying on teacher referrals or parent nominatio

References

* Card, D., & Giuliano, L. (2016). Identifying high-potential students: The role of testing and teacher judgment.American Economic journal: Applied Economics, 8(1), 179-208.
* New York City Independent budget Office. (2022).Gifted and talented programs in New York City.
* Pfeiffer, S. I., & Petscher, Y. (2008). Giftedness from a developmental perspective. Routledge.
* The Washington Post Editorial Board. (2025, January 26). The misguided attack on gifted education. The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2025/01/26/misguided-attack-gifted-education/