To get slightly fed up with post's about 'gifted and talented' children

[MrsMertle]

because I think some of them are just an excuse for parents to show off, when what they really want to say is "look at my DC, they are so much cleverer than yours!!"

ds1 is in the top 0.1%, as is ds2 and dd1. They are much mush easier than dd2 who is disabled.
But then I home edded them for years so didn't have to deal with crappy schools.

I get so annoyed when I see the little mites who are forced to do extra homework or homework over the hoildays. It's no life for them. They should be allowed to be children and play. The holidays are so they can rest and play, not so they can do more school work. It makes me so MAD! They are just good at doing school work because of the training, not truly gifted. What a waste of a childhood.

avenanap, you seem to be saying that its OK for your child to be regarded as gifted but not for anyone elses or very few others. If it was only for 0.1% then I think you would be very lonely on this section of mumsnet . Also your son may be the only one on the register at school. How many would that be out of a year of 120 pupils, my maths is not great.

The gifted and talented programme has been going on in the states for a long time. We adopted it years later. Don't reckon it was down to that one case. Or even to stop bright kids going into a private school. Most parents of bright kids don't have the money. There are some very bright ones from poor families too,

FWIK it was a government initiative to pick up on underachieving kids with potential and adopt the philosophy that its 'cool to be clever'. That's what the literature I was given was saying anyway.

avenanap thats ok, but as a parent to a child with severe sn, I think you can understand me being annoyed

The interpretation of it is just too wide eve. 10% is too big of a gap IMO. There are few children who are truly gifted, but all of them need support. The top 0.1% are a totally different kettle of fish though and they need more support than is availiable at the moment. Mumsnet is open to all, regardless of their child's ability which is how it should be. I don't mean to say that it should only be for the parents of those top 0.1% as all parents need support, however, I find the term gifted misleading. Every child, no matter their ability should be given the support and right education they need to fullfill their potential but it is really hard to do this for some children. There is nothing set aside for the top 0.1%, they often have issues and social problems which are not addressed in alot of schools. There is a difference between a child that has been coached, a bright child and a gifted child but I don't think that having a goal of naming the top 10% in each school is helping any of these children.

Saint, I understand.

"1 "Needs of the top 10% can be accommodated in the classroom without extra support". Oh yeah? How do you know?"

I have seen teachers accodomate very bright children easily. They put them on a table, prehaps call it "Apples" and set them harder work. Its hardly rocket science. Teachers have done this for donkey's years.

How do you know that majority of teachers are useless at catering for bright children. I have worked in quite a few schools and seen teachers cater well for bright kids.

"
2 The govt is trying to combat the attitude prevalent among some groups of children that to be a high achiever is uncool. We don't want to waste talent if we can avoid it, so the idea is to boost the idea of academic achievement being worthwhile.

3 What have famous geniuses got to do with it? As another poster has said, we are not talking about genius, we are talking about the top 10%. "

Why should bright children get preferential treatment to say, average children?

It is different for children with disablities. Life is fundermentally unfair and extra support from an LSA is an attempt to try and readdress the unfairness. Admitally I don't think it comes close in cases like Riven's daughter.

For an example of a less special need. County paid for a soundfield system to be fitted in my son's class becuase there were three boys with hearing problems including my son. My son's hearing loss is pretty mild and the soundfield system really helps him.

It might seem unfair to spend thousands of pounds of three six year old boys, but then its unfair that these six year old boys cannot hear the leaves rustle in the wind or a cat purr without their hearing aids.

I still think there are very few exceptional children. It is not that unusual to have a reading age three years ahead of chronological age. A teacher might only meet such a child once or twice in their entire career.

It is unusual to be capable of solving quadratic equations at six years old. Or to be exceptionally good at music, art at six years old. Rather than spreading the money at the top 10% it would be better to concetrate gifted and talented resources at the top 0.1%. (1 in a 1000) Ie. those who really don't fit the system.

I agree that the designation of "Gifted and Talented" in schools at the moment is arbitrary and misguided. I understand that having a truly gifted child can be difficult and hard work. I totally accept that parents of children with disabilities and SNs will not always be in the mood to hear about someone else's young Mozart in the making and will be rightly offended at having their child's difficulties and challenges compared with said young Mozart - G&T is in many cases a very nice problem to have.

That said, I think the G&T topic is important. There is a need there, but it does sometimes feel like a very very exclusive club. I have posted there myself once, and received some good support but also some very snide comments telling me I didn't belong and was just bragging. I had put it in the G&T topic because I thought that people who didn't want to see posts about giftedness would have hidden the topic.

Sometimes maybe people are bragging, but it may be that they are genuinely worried. IME if you have a toddler who appears bright and articulate and maybe takes an interest in something intellectualish like learning letters, everyone around starts telling you they are going to be at least Prime Minister, if not a triple Nobel Prize winner. This happened to me, and despite the fact I've had this label myself throughout my schooling, have spent my education in various ivory towers and have met many real geniuses, it still Freaked me Right Out. How much worse for someone who doesn't have any experience of it?

There is always the fear that a gifted (or not really gifted but labelled as such) child must necessarily be a maladjusted egghead with no friends, as many people on here have implied. This is of course not as big a worry as having a child with a major health problem. But then we have threads about which three wheeler should I buy? Threads about how to tend your ladygarden when 9 months preg (who the f*ck cares?) and it doesn't generate this kind of aggro.

"I still think there are very few exceptional children. It is not that unusual to have a reading age three years ahead of chronological age. A teacher might only meet such a child once or twice in their entire career.

It is unusual to be capable of solving quadratic equations at six years old. Or to be exceptionally good at music, art at six years old. Rather than spreading the money at the top 10% it would be better to concetrate gifted and talented resources at the top 0.1%. (1 in a 1000) Ie. those who really don't fit the system."

I agree completely with the above. Ds2 is stupidly good at reading. He's in year 2 now, but has been able to read at almost adult levels (in terms of decoding- he needs help understanding what he is reading but reading levels don't test that) since year 1. He hasn't needed any special resources. The school keeps him well supplied with books, and he goes to the library. Easy peasy. He has a friend in his class working way above everyone else in maths. She;s just on a higher workbook. The 0.1% are a different matter and of course should be able to access the same sort of support as a severe dyslexic. The severe dyslexic will probably have to fight every bit as hard for that support though. It's a problem with school that cater for the majority and really there probably isn't much else they can do - ds1 can't be catered for with the majority so goes to an SLD/PMLD school, but that's not going to be an option -or even a desirable one- for those who are truly gifted. Segregation is a good thing for ds1- but I can't see how it could be good for someone who will eventually have to live in the real world.

hmm... recently I was part of a thread where people were oh so positive about their childrens sn and now, some of those people are here saying oh how can you compare, because it is so difficult...and someone else was really slated about the opinion thye held..but tbh...what do people want...if someone says they could bnot imagine they could live with a severely disabled child it's said just how rewarding it is...if someone compares sn/sen/g&T al of a sudden people are stupid and it is so difficult and such hard work, etc...when having a disabled child (see...now I agree t would be much more dificult...but, how can you then say oh, you are silly if you wouldn't want a child like this...it is an enrichment...( I mean they are, but how can you possibly say you can NOT understand why someone, if knowing what is ahead, would choose against it)

I think if you read that thread you would see that people were saying it was difficult. Having a child who is difficult does not mean you would want to get rid of them. Or that you decide they're not worth helping. If I manage to teach my non-verbal child with bugger all language to think in sentences and communicate via typing it will be the biggest most rewarding and enriching achievement of my life. It won't be possible to top that. It is also (I know because I am doing it) incredibly difficult. So is climbing Everest. Doesn't put some people off trying.

But I take it you've just name changed to stir or something.

Incidentally, wrt that other thread I met a child with DS recently taking 9 GCSE's so issues surrounding education might not be the best place to bring up that other thread.

Posters on the other thread were objecting to the idea that their child with SN was a burden who had wrecked the lives of their siblings etc.

I don't see the problem with the G&T topic. I thought the whole point of having it in the first place was because people were complaining about the threads being all over the other topics and that this was a way for them to be hidden if people wanted to.

I've seen FreakyLady posting on other threads last few days or so, it's not just a name change for this thread.

I do feel a little uncomfortable with FreakyLady's post - feels too much like cheap point scoring to refer back to another thread in that way.

no strong feelings on G&T,don't read it much.but if no likey no read it.

i have no interest in baby Olympics

but i suppose for some it is safe space to talk anonymously without someone saying in RL ypu are "showing off"

erm, if you mean me,..I have only namechanged into a halloween name...although recently namechanged to fairladyrantalot...but used to be 3andnomore, and that is on my profile, too...
no not shit stirring...obviously I am not saying people should get rid of |Kids...but people were so astonished anyone could think it is to hard, on the thread I was talking about....and the person I am talking about tried to say, that, well, if you think there is no problems then don't complan...that person was not me...

I am just trying to say, that people sometimes pick and chose a bit about how they put things...in order to underpin what they try to say...but sometimes it seems to be not quite hand in hand....not sure if that makes sense...but you just can't have it every way, basically...either you find it hard (if rewarding) but then you have to understand just how difficult it is, and why others may decide agaisnt this...or you say it's all great, and then ther is no place on threasd like this, really, becausew you will be happy with your situation...if you are not, how can people who aren't then be really aggressively against people chosing agaisnt it, iykwim...

I am just tryong to understand peoples's attitude, because it seems to change depending on which sort of tpic people post....
no cheap scoring involeved...I was not that involved int the thread that I mentioned but felt that person got a fair bit of stick, when I could, a little bit understand where she came from...

maybe if you think in terms of the mummy lioness instinct - that because of a child's difficulties a parent may feel more loving and fiercely protective?

Reallytired - you may have seen teachers accommodate their top groups easily, and yes, I agree, teachers have always done that.
But sometimes they are being accommodated, not stretched in that case.

Also, since long before the current G & T system, there have been schools which spend money on providing something extra for that top few percent eg when I was at primary school in the late 60s, there was a group of 9 or so children who were taken out for extra maths. That was a small group for those days when you had 40 in a class, so expensive in teacher time.

But such provision was haphazard and underfunded.

Of course all educational special needs should be catered for, whether it's deafness, communication disorder or whatever. And I'm sure the bulk of the SEN money goes to those children.

copper..but, on this thread the same people are saying how difficult it is...which is hardship surely....
I think all people should get the help and should have the opportunities they can and should have...so, am not disagreeing in that respect wiht other people...
like i SAId on this thread...my es is on g&t registre for his arts, but that is it, rally, most other things he finds difficult...art is his niche....and he is gifted wiht that, but it possibly does not compare wiht academically geniousses...bt tbh, I could not care less....I am just glad he has an obvious talent that will be abe to boost his confidence/selfesteem...which hopefully will enable his learning in other subjects...

Freakylady - The objections on the other thread were to being told that their child with SN was a burden. One poster even went so far as to say that lots of parents with children with SN had confessed to her that they wished their child has never been born and insinuated that secretly we probably all felt the same way. Being difficult and being a burden are two entirely different things and posters tried to get that point across by explaing that their child with SN is as loved and as much a part of the family as their NT children. They also talked about what their child with SN gets out of life. No-one has said that life isn't difficult.

hmm..I suppose...I just still think being honest about your feelings is a better way and much less confusing to others...why don't people jsut say...I find it extremely difficult, but I also feel really protective and just love my child...rather then trying to bend things the way it fits....i.e. play up diificulties as well as play them donw....and that does seem to happen....however, I may just misunderstand and all that...but it does, at times, seems like that....
btw...I don't think it is meant to happen, but it;s the way we often are....but it doesn't help....it doesn't help people to understand, iykwim...it confuses...
we all understand the normal highs and lows, I think...but sometimes that is not what is shown

copper...but that is what comes someitmes across...probably not meaning too...but that is what I meant to flag up here...it can become a bit confusing...because,,at one point all the dififcultites are displayed....which means it is a hard life (not a burden, just very difficult)...but , if it suits it can be played down considerably...as on that thread...like they are all so brill, etc...but then on this thread, those people are, erm how can you dare to compare your life to mine...
and I think that was what that poster was trying to get at...

tbh, i AM EACH TO their own, and obviously no matter what situation we are in, we all have low points and highs...but I think no one has the right to belittle, just because they assume the next person hasn't got as difficult a life as them...obviously a lot is about perception...and perceptions do change....but I rathe rhave people admitting tha yes there life is more difficult, but that would not change there mind...then people saying at one point, oh but life is so much harder, but then not understand why other people may not chose the life (if they have the choice...because of course obviously choise is not even an option...different story altogether...and that was also a bit attacked on that thread....)

The SN board is a place to vent and swap tips/info and offer virtual tea and sympathy- so by nature it's going to focus on problem areas - bit like the relationships board mostly focuses on problematic relations with family/friends.

IN short I am trying to say, if you look at this thread and the other one...well...can you blame anyone getting confused....

Sorry but the support's just not there for children like ds. He was assessed prior to leaving his old school, he has a reading and comprehension age of 16+ (the scale only goes to 16), a maths age of 15 and he's 9. If you can find me a school that can support him the way he needs, with the academic and pastoral care then I take my hat off to you. Do you seriously think that the teachers have the time to teach a 5 year old Newton's laws beause he's read about them in a book and is interested or to teach him astrophysics because he wants to know how they work out the speed that the planets move around the sun? He's now on Philosophy and psychology asking questions about morals and human behaviour. He really doesn't fit in the system at all. He's a complete square peg. It's a novelty to some people to have or see a child like this but at some point reality needs to kick in.