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.

hmmm I think i get you. Yes a child on the G and T list in a failing school would be unlikely to get on to the list if they moved to a school where all the children were above average. These schools do (sometimes) have lists though. The children on the list tend to be way above average (which is level four BTW) by year six though. For this reason when they go on courses that G and T children get invited to you get one or two children that are very very bright a few bright and one or two average children. That is if you are comparing them to the national average rather than their school. This makes the whole thing more pointless than ever. Most of us agree G and T wasn't a good system, I think

Marnie are you thinking top 5 % of the country rather than within classes at school maybe ?

Had my dd1 (had always been told she was highly intelligent) gone to a private school I'm sure she'd have got great GCSEs and been heading for her choice of university.

Guess what? She goes to state school and still is. Also, there are quite a lot of very very bright kids at her state (admittedly grammar) school.

Um, a bit confused now. I think G+T is the top 5% of children in a class or school year (I don't know how they work this out).

I also know that there are clusters of high performing schools where the schools average is at/above (very high) the national average and in these circumstances you could do G+T and pick the to 5% but since every child in the school is doing so well, were they compared to G+T child they would be equal or perhaps better.

I agree with you that G+T is a bad way of executing educational support to children.

Personally, and I guess that this is partly why teachers dislikes SAT's so much is that it almost sets the standard that teachers should tach the top 5% and the SEN children, when actually what they need to do is teach each child to their own level, as each child's level varies from year to year (like with growth spurts). These schools have their eyes on the big prize, which is not the beat SAT results but that each child should attain the most that they are capable of.

I'm anti G+T for this reason (as if you couldn't guess). I'm not quite sure how I would feel if my DC's were in an area where they have G+T, but I think I'd be trying to club together with other parents to form some sort of strategy for identifying able children and ensuring they get the support that they need.

Youve lost me again Marnie. It is the top 5% in your childs class regardless of national averages. There will always be a top 5% wherever the school is.

We're still together. I do mean the top 5% o your childs class. (I just didn't know if, for schools with more than 1 class per year group they took the top 5% across the year.)

I don't know about that. In our school each teacher decides each year. It may be different in others though.

I don't either, but life could be v. unfair potentially in schools with more than one class per year if the school teacher picks the top 5%.

Class A: G+T children are 1, 2 and 3
Class B: G+T children are 11, 12 and 13

However, because class A overall has more bright children. Children 4,5 and 6 all of whom are brighter (more G+T) than 11, 12 and 13, miss out!!

And potentially that could be within the same school!

I think if you go to a school that has more than one class per year and does G+T you should find out how the G+T children are selected.

Yup, pointless.

It used to be the top 5% nationally by objective measures such as CAT tests or actual marks in SATs tests but lots of schools said 'oh we don't have any children like that in our school' so then to make sure it caught the right children the scheme was expanded to be the top 5% in all schools.

Although this was done to help identification it was precisely this expansion that "broke" the whole thing and brought out all the sneeriness associated with G&T.

Webwiz it was indeed the top 5% nationally at the beginning and I wish they had left it thus, as those bright children might have got some attention paid to them. Would have avoided all the sneering aswell e.g 'top 5% in a crap school means nothing, they would be average in ours' etc etc.

Marnie, I think most areas did at one point and probably still do have a G&T register, maybe your area don't make it known but some children will be on it.

I agree abouteve I think that originally when NAGTY was set up it was actually the top 2% nationally. A good idea spoilt by how it was executed.

Diracgirl You have just said in your OP all the things some of us have been saying for ages. Seems as if we only notice these inequalities when it's OUR TURN to suffer from them!
Seriously though, I agree with all you say and really we need some kind of petition for the more able. I'm sure if less able children were treated as badly as the G&T ones there'd be an uproar.

Yes Pixie it was a defined criteria ie above a set score in a CAT test. The list of what was required used to be on the NAGTY website.

Some schools just use it as a tick box. We were surpised to hear that DS2 was labelled G&T beacuse we hadn't actually noticed anything about him that would have indicated that... But I think the school has to fill a quota, and his year group were not particulalry distinguished so teh bar was lower...

Our school, secondary, had never heard of it in primary/infants used CAT scores, SAT scores and teacher observations. Think that was fairly robust and difficult to argue with.

It was still just a tick box and nothing was done to differentiate. It will be interesting to see how this experiment goes (as that is what I think it was) next year as the G&T set identified in year 7, do A levels, some may underachieve, some may get 3 A's but I bet some who weren't identified will surpass them. I have an idea who was on it and will be nosying when the time comes..

Don't know but judging by the OP I guess it was a wind up, surely.

Many 'gifted' children do fine in state schools. Admitedly, my ds has not yet gone to secondary school but is considered gifted having achieved level 5's in in KS2 SATS by the end of Year 3 and now working at GCSE level maths age 9.

He has 8 older cousins who all went through the state system and achieved offers at Oxford, Cambridge, Bristol and Leeds Universities. Yes, they were bored sometimes, but then I'm bored by the world of work sometimes - that's life. Often they had great teachers who extended their minds.

Independent schools also don't offer all the answers though. You can be just as bored at an independent which 'drills' children in often very uninspiring ways to get the results they want. Not teach then to think.

And whilst I conceed that independent educated children are over represented at universities, a friend who lectures tells me they are often spoon fed, and struggle with getting to grips with the self motivating that university level education requires.

There's no easy answer. Bu if you do have a gifted child you will be exhausted by all the ranting! Better to think about how to work with whatever school your dc goes to.

Yes, the NAGTY scheme was originally for the top 2% nationally.
As I said, finding that my DC qualified was a great relief because we had begun to doubt our own eyes and ears!
I really don't think being in the NAGTY scheme made any difference to her directly but it did give us the comfort of knowing that if she were ever again left to sleep during a maths class which was repeating stuff I knew for a fact they had done 3 years before.....you get my drift.

I just read the thread title G and T children as in 'Gin and Tonic children'.

Pour yourself a big one NoMoreChocBiscuits...

DiracGirl if you are concerned that your child has more potential than the school can handle (!) why don't you supplement his education yourself? Ultimately, it's your responsibility because he is your child. Teachers/classrooms/schools are a resource available for you to utilise, but they only make up part of a child's education. Surround him with other opportunities - don't ask the government to provide the extras. Whatever they offer wouldn't be deemed good enough by most people's standards. Either too exclusive, or not challenging enough!