Why aren't there schools for G and T children?

[DiracGirl]

After being told that our my nephew's abilities out stripped those of his class mates my sister began to panic.
There was no way she could afford the fees of an independent school and we don't live in the kind of place that offers a choice in state school.
Many, and there are many, of the independent schools in the area offer little in the way of help and none of them provide grants to 5 year olds.
This angers me.
Why isn't there...something!
These children are our future scientists, doctors, inventors and, well, anything they want really.
It's about time the government realised, these children have special needs too. They deserve a right to a standard of education comparable with their intelligence.
If you put a child with the classic idea of special needs in a class of "ordinary" children and ignored them there would be outrage. So why is it acceptable to waste the talents of the gifted?
Should a child with intelligence greater than that of his or her peers be left to rot in a dull stupor whilst the rest catch up??
I've spent hours trawling the Internet. ISC, Mensa, direct gov, the lot. All I can find is a poor child gets a nod of appreciation for making the government stats look good at exam time and not much else.
I know there are those of you who scoff and say "a bright child will do well anywhere!" but is that the best we can offer...do well???
How about getting the best from them? Or helping them grow to THEIR full potential? Challanging them?
Is it so much to ask?
Enrichment classes? A few hours to feel segregated? To be labelled a swat, geek or freak?
I say give them an a place they can be given the education they need, with like minded children and well trained staff that can cope.
There are a few gifted children in my family and I'm sure I'll be having the same rant in a 2 years when DS is in the same position, although I have planned for this contingency and have looked into independent schooling (13 years on value baked beans) but I only have one child, my sister has three. I don't need to show you the maths to explain a lottery win is in order.

lol at the 5 year old being too bright for state school

Omg please won't someone think of all the poor clever children in state schools :(

I agree with you op, it is much easier for average children to do well at most schools.The understanding of true giftedness is very limited indeed.However he is still very little and its not an issue so much until he is seven or so,unless he starts to misbehave out of boredom as a friends son did.He is now at a tiny prep,but as you say not everyone has that option.Lots of support at home will help a lot,and as much extra curricular things as he wants to explore and they can afford.The danger with gifted and even just very clever children is that they become bored and disengaged with learning so following his interests as much as possible out of school might help.

To answer you initial question, there are in some areas. From what I have found out the 'best' state grammars are more selective and academic than even the top private schools.

There are still some special schools for children with certain disabilities etc but these are now politically unpopular and inclusion is the buzz word of the moment.

I dont think that by having more schools for the most gifted would stop them from developing social skills. How is mixing with only other v bright children less 'social' than only mixing with rich kids at private school or a comp where everyone's from one estate?

you'll need to go on the cheap on a lot more than value baked beans to send your PFB to a private school.

Home Education?

I do find it extraordinary that people automatically assume that a bright child needs to go to private school, and that state school sin;t good enough for them!

Silly arse. There used to be a poster on here called Martianbishop, who was chock-full of wisdom. I recall that she once posted that the hallmark of a truly gifted child is that they teach themselves. They have a curiosity that just doesn't stop. Trust me a truly gifted child would be fine in the state system.

I do believe that to be true, entirely true. But that really only applies to truly gifted children. If your nephew is bright (but not truly gifted) and you fear a weak peer group, there are G&T schemese. There are state grammar schools further on. He'll be fine

You are worrying too much

Oh dear

Dd1 is 'gifted' at reading apparently, her state school has put on extra class for 'gifted readers' (either it's a really good school or they just mean good at reading. I very much doubt one school has enough truely gifted pupils to fill a whole reading group)

Dd1 says the group is "just too funny" she enjoys it and I am happy that she is enjoying her learning. I don't like her being labelled. It sets the expectations too high and sets the child for a fall imo.

Pixie you say:

Children who are going to be doctors and lawyers need excellent social skills, and need to be able to talk to a wide variety of people, not just those who are similarly 'gifted'.

You imply you have to be 'gifted' to be a doctor or lawyer, really?

This label 'gifted' is often bestowed upon children who have already developed certain social and learning skills. Displaying various attitudes, nodding, smiling, appearing engaged, being very articulate - asking questions about what's been said etc.

It's dangerous to start labeling children 'gifted and talented'. It's ok if you mean their current levels of attainment surpass those of their peers but if you use it to suggest they possess a superior all round inherent ability it's not a good idea for lots of reasons.

Anyway as others have said there is a confusion around what constitutes a 'gifted' child. IMO those that are are a vanishingly small percentage. Even those children who are considered a 'genius' (or whatever the plural of genius is) often haven't discovered their 'gifts' completely independently.

The was a scheme a few years ago for G&T children - The National Academy for Gifted and Talented Youth. It ran courses all over the country, sent out newsletters, and schools had G&T Coordinators. I think it started 8 years ago, at least that was when my DC was identified.
Sadly, it died a death.

DC did just fine at a bog standard comprehensive and could not have been more successful if we had paid a fortune for private education - academically brilliant and socially adept.

The primary years are tricky but they find their own level at secondary school.

There was quite a lot of criticism re: this scheme I believe Austen (If this was part of the scheme I'll describe below). I think, on balance, it did more harm than good. Being 'registered bright' put pressure on many and made them more anxious and cautious learners. Having said that those on the list who weren't truly 'gifted' suffered from self fulfilling prophecy/pygmalion effect and went on to exceed expectations.

Research showed that less than half the children who came in the top 5% on national tests at eleven went on to remain in the top 5% at GCSE. Because of this the Specialist Schools and Academies Trust (SSAT) wanted to ally with the DFES and universities to link up with these 'gifted' eleven year olds. The trust's chairman was convinced that these clever eleven year olds should get 3 As (back then the top grade) at A-level and if not secondary school heads 'held accountable'. They didn't see that spurts and dips in school performance were entirely normal.

I have 2 children , neither are gifted because very few children are. One is average ( with the wind behind them they could be the good side of average).The other is very bright.

If I were to spend money on an independent education it would go on the average one.

My bright child is in a state comprehensive ( ironically in a grammar area but they didnt want to go to the grammar) and is very well served. Surrounded by other like minded children, has been on residentials, stretched in lessons and lots of extra curruicular activities.

I was 'G&T' at 5yo apparently. Was absolute top in my class through primary and first bit of secondary. I won a prize for artwork, I could out spell all my primary school peers. Things just clicked with me and I found them very simple. I found everything very very easy at this age...

Yeah... Turned out I was just an early developer, understood things early on, then when I was 13yo and evened out with my peers at school (note: just a year after I started and thought I was All That)

I'm clever, yes. G&T? No. Definitely not.

Academically brilliant, socially adept and presumably motivated and blessed with good teaching, austen. You were fortunate to have that winning combination with your children.

Not all children are so straightforward and their local bog standard may short change them.

Finding their own level, for many children, can mean settling for anonymity and minimal effort, regardless of ability.

I am very thankful that my dd did not attend a school for specially gifted children.

She didn't just need to develop the social skills to deal with other bright people, which is what would have happened in a special g&t school. In life, she will need the social skills to deal with the rest of the world too, with people who are not bright- because sooner or later chances are she will end up working with them. She needed to learn to adapt her conversation to other people and make them feel at ease, and she needed to learn to feel at ease herself with people who were different from her; it is as important a skill as being able to read blank verse.

"If you put a child with the classic idea of special needs in a class of "ordinary" children and ignored them there would be outrage."

And bless you for thinking children with special needs get all their needs met. You should spend more time on the SN forum.

Dd, who is also physically disabled, spent a whole term without maths tuition because she was unable to crawl up the stairs to the classroom. This seems to me rather more serious than her sometimes being bored in class. It is not the bright children who get shortchanged by the educational system; it is the ones with SN. I know because I deal with both.

G & T is a very moveable feast.I used to teach in a Sec Mod in a small country town which also had a grammar school. SO our students had all failed the 11+. Yet we had the same number of G&T students as the grammar.

Yes, because we all know that a very bright 5yo is automatically gifted. They may be of course, but not necessarily - some kids just 'get it' quicker and level out over the years.

"family and I'm sure I'll be having the same rant in a 2 years when DS is in the same position"

OMG please don't pressurise him like that!

However OP I certainly do agree that many schools do not provide enough for gifted/above average learners, which of course is awful. I was very lucky that my primary was great at differentiating work, and I went on to grammar school.

I think you should not worry.

It is not at all sure that the children currently labelled as G&T WILL be our future scientists, you are getting a bit carried away there.

The interesting thing is that children develop at different rates. Some are G&T as little ones, but then "even out". And more importantly, a lot of children do not do that well at primary. But start to "click" at secondary and end up doing extremely well.

I have one child who is GT, but as far as I can see he is just "ahead for his age", and I am not worried about him. He is not bored at school at all, and he just does the normal school work and then is allowed to join the work for the year above (very small classes, y1 and 2 mixed).

I have another child who is remedial for everything (extra help).

TBH, I think they will both end up doing well, eventually, if maybe not in the same way.

The one who is "behind" is my little scientist, he can concentrate so well, and builds difficult things, draws complex charts and does well in abstract thinking, yet struggles with writing.

To segregate children into G&T and "ordinary" does not do justice to the wide variety of skills and rates of development of children.

It is all very fluid.

The children who are G&T at 5 may well be "ordinary" by 8, or the other way around. I sometimes work with y1 and y2 children, and I LOVE seeing how different they are, they all develop at an individual rate, there is no "average" or "ordinary" really.

FWIW, the only scientist I know (working for NASA) did poorly at school until he was 14.

It is not as black and white as you think.

I think our lovely State school caters very well for the different abilities.

I am sure you will be able to find a good school as well.