My 4-year old is smarter than yours

Parents that can afford it, enroll their little munchkins in test prep centers, at the young age of four. Companies like Bright Kids NYC thrive on prepping kids for all the new tests at New York City public schools that will segregate kids, by gifted and talented, or just plain regular. Children are tutored to outsmart their peers by preparing for the OLSAT, the ERB, the CogAT, the Standford-Binet, the NNAT2, the Core Concepts.

Our schools choose the smartest of the smart by how they perform on standardized tests. From age 4 to 24 –the SAT for college, the LSAT for law school or the MCAT for medical school. Everyone has to take classes to score high enough to pursue their dreams — or their parent’s dreams if you’re four years old.

Parents and schools are seeing the results of these test-prepping centers — there were 5,000 four-year olds in New York City who qualified for a gifted seat — more than double the number five years ago.  This begs the question — Are there more gifted kids, or do most kids learn with one-on-one tutoring and training at a young age?

Standardized tests have been around for a long time, but I didn’t take one before kindergarten. I remember at some point when I was identified in the top 2%. They gave me a list of books I could read in the school library and put me in advanced math courses. Did it help me succeed? It made me think I was smart.

I remember the stress when my kids were tested in 3rd grade for the accelerated program, called GATE. The prestige. The glory. The pride to mingle with parents of other highly gifted children. I knew that if my kids made the score they would get preferential treatment. Teachers would see them differently than other students. In fact, they would get the best teachers. Their classmates and future friends would be the smart kids.

There was one middle school that would “allow” parents to request the higher track classes without being tested into it. Only one. But many parents chose that school to give their kids a chance.

When I was in school you didn’t prepare for a standardized test. There were no classes in “how to ace the SAT or ACT for college.” Now if you don’t take one of those prep courses, you’re diminishing your chances — cause everyone else is learning how to answer those questions. And yea, I made my kids take practice tests and read books on how to score high, so they could land a seat in the college of their choice.

Just think, we tell our kids, “you can be anything you want to be.” Hah. That’s not true. If you don’t score high enough on the entrance exams, you can’t become a doctor, lawyer, or engineer. And most kids can’t score high enough unless they take the $1000 prep course.

Now, a 4-year old can’t get into the best kindergartens without scoring high on an entrance exam. Parents want what’s best for their kids. I get it. I have 5. I want what’s best. I want my kids in the best of the best class. I agree.

But then you find yourself signing your 3-year old up for classes that train her in “how to take a standardized test” at age 4.

Our kids will see the class distinctions — the trained, gifted kids whose parents work full time can afford the prepping centers. From the get-go these kids will be identified by their teachers as “smarter.”

And don’t think that Obama’s universal pre-school is the great leveler. Parents will still compete for the elite seats for their kids. And they’ll enroll them in special classes to get into those elite seats. And kids at the age of 4 will understand who of their friends are talented and who are not. Based on a standardized test. The kids that didn’t get that extra training — one and a half hours each week for six months —  they won’t be in the preferred class, even though they’re talented. They won’t get to hear how smart they are. Even though they are.

And test manufacturers and educators who make their salary designing these tests will make money, thinking they are being of service.