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.

Following this thread with interest.

I agree with Pag that SN support is essential to allow DC with SEN to access education. That has got to trump the needs of the G and T to have "support" to stretch them further.

However, the pps who are saying "gifted kids will achieve in a normal school and don't need pushing" are surely referring to some G and T kids who are self-starters? I imagine some gifted kids are also lazy / jumbled thinkers / disorganised / chatterboxes / immature and therefore need pushing lots of guidance to achieve their potential?

Like Jajas, I am one of MN's rarebirds: willing to state publicly that my DC (gasp) show no signs of G and T. But if they did, I am not sure I would put them in a local primary and leave them to get on with it.

They need the same amount of guidance as any average disorganised, jumbled thinker.

If a child is truly G and T they can thrive anywhere.

With limited resources what is more important?

1. Trying to ensure that as many children as possible acheive the basics and hopefully a great deal more for most of them.
2. Elevating the already successful to be more so, at the expsense of the majority?

I have 3 DC, 1 clever but lazy with moderate scores at school, 1 clever, hard-working and motivated with excellent scores, 1 probably clever but hard to tell but very imaginative, knowledgeable and creative but way behind his peers re school levels . Which child should be helped more? The successful one or the one who is struggling to master the first steps?

That's my point, manic.

All sorts of kids are jumbled thinkers / disorganised etc. Why do people assume G and T are all self starters who will succeed anywhere?

why not join the NAGC as extra curricular?

I think it's a bit alarmist to panic over a 5 year old's potential and worry that he will 'rot' in a state school. Why not wait and see how he gets on?

My DD1 would qualify as G&T by most measures and has just started at a super-selective state grammar (and without tutoring!). She went to a fairly unambitious primary where she was not particularly challenged accademically. However, she was very happy, made lots of friends and had the time and energy to pursue many interests inside and outside school. My feeling is that primary school needs to teach the basics, but a lot of it is about learning to socialise, work in a group, build relationships, gain maturity etc and not just the academic side.

Provided that a bright child is happy, engaged and well-adjusted, I think it's unnecessary to worry.

I think its much more important to that a gifted child can be included and feel part of the class they are in (at state or private school). My DS was reading when he was two, and doing y2 maths and reading harry potter in reception, he had a photographic memory for spelling and grammar and could just do it!!! The school have been amazing with him - although openly admit they have near had the likes of him before. They provide extension work in all subjects but keep him in his peer group and he loves it. Most of all he is being allowed to be the little boy and have his childhood - this is most important you can't get this time back. Learning everyday but playing lots too is what you need. Leave the heavy stuff for secondary!!!