It's called Able, Gifted and Talented just now and a child can be identified based on strength in single area (academic or musical or sporting etc) or across a range of subjects. But yes, it should be 10% of school population therefore context-dependent. The list, usually seen as being within the remit Special Educational Needs, should also be flexible to allow pupils to be included as and when appropriate.
Thank you for that Joyn and Bells...DD is in the top 10% for literacy and seems to be attending some sort of focus group. I kept wondering why she was having extra help if she was doing so well but I guess if it's seen as SEN then she would do....could that be it?
I think it varies - some schools don't do top 10%. My DD (Y5) is achieving the highest levels in assesments in her year of 18 but is not classed as G&T - she is 1-2 yr ahead of age expected levels. She is just a bright kid. DS (Y4) is part of a cohort of 14 where 3 of them are classed G&T - they are achieving consistently 3-4 yrs ahead of expected outcomes in assesments.
I am pleased with the way my school does it (ie. not following the 10% rule) - the top 10% of an arbitrary group of kids means nothing in my opinion - it's how far each kid is ahead of age related expectations that matters I think - 1-2 years isn't exceptional, consistently being 3-4 years ahead is.
Both my kids learn within their relevant ability groups in the classroom and have level appropriate work - the only benefit of DS being G&T is he has an IEP (Individual Education Plan) which I see as a formal agrement and review process with the school that just ensures he won't be left to coast but will be pushed to his potential.