Talk:Rationale for gifted programs

message: Thx for the article! I made a few wiki-format changes. The thing i think it most needs now is a briefer, more focused intro, preferably incl the article title near the very beginning. See Wikipedia:Lead_section and Wikipedia:Guide_to_writing_better_articles#Lead_section. And more links in the text or See Also would also help people find/use it, as well as linking to here from other articles. Hope this helps, "alyosha" (talk) 23:16, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Thx and suggestion 

message: This article seems heavily in favor of gifted education programs without giving much thought to those who oppose them.  Perhaps a "criticisms" section could help? (For the record, I'm in favor of gifted programs; I just recognize the need to maintain NPOV, especially when dealing with controversial matters such as gifted education). Jeff Silvers 21:16, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV 

message: As a gifted child who has been exposed to many suggestions of program closure, I have to say that not only are good criticisms for gifted education few and far between, most of them are only applicable to individual schools or school boards. They mostly have to do with budgeting and classroom sizes, not with the opinion that gifted children should not recieve proper education.
I think that there can be a tendency for some to view money spent on gifted education programs as money being taken away from the mainstream school population, rather than as a separate budget or as part of special needs funding, ie., if $200,000 per year is being spent on a gifted program in a school, then that's seen as $200,000 of the budget that should be used to benefit all of the children in the school but that's only being used to help a small percentage of them. 
Ideally, it should really be a case of one amount of funding being given for the school as a whole, and then a separate sum on top of that for special needs, including gifted education, with the latter sum never being used for anything except the programs it is intended to be used for.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.95.162.29 (talk) 11:11, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arguing the argument 

message: This article seems to be original research representing one person's point of view. It needs to be edited, expanded, and modified to represent a broader point of view. It should probably be combined with the larger article on gifted education.Richard Dates (talk) 11:11, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for your suggestion. When you feel an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes.  Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the  link at the top. The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes — they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills.  New contributors are always welcome. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons why you might want to).  WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:41, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Original Research

message: Most of the material in this article should be merged into the main article on Gifted education, with this title serving as a redirect to the appropriate article section. That will better match the structure of reliable sources and better fit Wikipedia's role as an encyclopedia. While I prepare to propose that through Wikipedia channels, please feel free to review a  source list on human intelligence and gifted education I maintain in user space for all Wikipedians to share. If you have any recommendations for additional sources, I would be glad to hear those. See you on the wiki. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 17:48, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  This should be merged with Gifted education