like cod

[cod]

arf at this section

parp parp parp
where the " my kid is thick " section

Yoyo Maths and Science set from yr7 and basically always have.
English used to set - trying mixed ability atm as an experiment.

Humanities/Arts/Technology mixed ability - always have I think.

In terms of expected progression - generally our CVA scores are not great. Though this is arguably because several of the feeder primaries are fantastic and at KS2 are IMO getting every ounce of possible potential from these kids. So the best even a superb school could hope for (which ours is not) would be "expected progression" .. i.e. neutral CVA.

We stream for english, maths sciences and MFL, but everything else is unset.

We don't realy have a g and t program

Seems to me, in my limited experience, that the reward for being G&T is more hours in school - after school clubs, summer schools etc. Where is the sense in that?
Why would that be an attractive proposition to someone already bored by school? Far better to let them work at their own level in normal classes.

Also there are too many assumptions made - very bright kids don't necessarily enjoy academic work. That may be why they are bored.

Only just caught your post jimjams, in answer to your question yes i do think that DS being "labelled" by the school has exacerbated his problems.
I wish that they hadnt ever told us about his abilities or "We stretch DS to his ability in class he is by far the most bright child in his class" what good has it done him?

He isnt in school and has no friends from school.
We dont tell any one about his academic abilities as some people in the past have seen it as bragging-which i hasten to add is certainly not in our case.
The other day his home tutor said "He is working at above my 15year olds level" i thought "Oh no not again"
They dont understand what it does for DS, DS gets embaressed and angry when they used to ask him to "perform" his special talent which in his case was numbers.
I think it sets children up to be bullied and unfortunately in DS case has done.

Also, we dont tell other parents or friends about DS abilities, I only mentioned it once to a friend and the look on her face said it all, its sad that it comes to that, i certainly wasnt bragging just telling her what the school had said one day.
Ever since then everytime i see her she tells me how DS should be back in school and that its not the right thing for him being at home.
Which makes me laugh, he probably wouldnt be at home would he if not for the G&T and the bullying.

wow, its an issue isn't it! I prob shouldn't be here putting my oar in as ds isn't at school yet and I have absolutely no reason to think G & T will feature in our lives! But I do wonder an awful lot about the whole system, particularly when I hear about Jenk's DS, I can't bear to think of him going through what he obviously has.

As Roisin said the justification for mixed abilty in comprehensive education has been so that children can learn from eachother, and so that any behavioural issues are hopefully spread evenly. However I simply don't these this is enough justification for the system, if the system ends up with such a divisive way of extending the more able.

In my experience of an inner city comprehensive the kids do not EVER learn from eachother or get inspired by eachother. I've simply never seen it happen. As Jenk could testify I'm sure, a more able child is seen as a target for hate rather than someone to learn from, learning being at the bottom of the list of things to do in school, usually!

In practice what this system has acheived is probably good education for the middlers, not good for the top and bottom acheivers, who become disengaged and often disruptive. And particularly for low abilies, sitting at the 'bottom' of the class can be heartbreakingly bad for their self esteem and self worth. Kids always know exactly where they are in the pecking order.

Is it kinder and more productive for everyone if we have top, middle and bottom sets?!

I think (though am no expert) that we are somewhat following in the footsteps of the US, where 'gifted' programmes routinely start around Grade 3 (our Year 4) and children are all tested for admission to them. Some schools do gifted pull-outs once or twice a week, others put together a congregated gifted class.

I agree that the top 5-10% of ability is not what I would consider 'gifted', but it seems it is in modern edu-speak.

Would like to add that the summer school was excellent.
ds2 quite enjoyed it, in fact he enjoyed it a lot. But that doesn't mean he would want to repeat it. He wouldn't do it again - he would much rather be out with his friends going for bike rides, swimming etc. and why not?

I´d like to support MNs with gifted and talented kids. Think it´s ridiculous to make out that these kids do not count as much as other children. Some of the comments here really piss me off. Can never understand why it is shameful to be good at smg. Don´t we all want this for ourselves and our children?

I think it's laughable that some posters are implying that those with an issue re the gifted and talented subject are indignant that their own - what was the parlance 'precious sprogs' are not in the same league. Carry on believing that if you like.

I'm actually fairly confident that both my children are quite bright (though how in the hell you 'quantify this for certain I do not know - particularly since Enysenck - the father of modern IQ tests has been discredited by some observers as developing racially biased IQ measures).

It is quite possible to be sceptical of the whole G&T thing without harbouring any insecurities about your own children's development.

ggglingoblin - I'm sure the boy I am thinking of is nothing like your son....he slyly trys to physically attack soft targets like very young children (I'm talking under 2's whilst he is in fact 4) whilst leaving those of a similar age unassaulted...hence our amusement at his mother's disillusioned perception that he is very bright and just not sufficiently stretched.

Have I really just read the following or have I missed something. Someone called jenk1 has been brave enough to post about the disgusting bullying her son has received: 'He has no friends, kids used to call him, one day a bunch of them lined him up against the wall spread his legs apart and kicked him so hard we had to get him medical assistance'.
The next person to post has basically said 'ho, ho, me and my mate thought you were called jerk1'. Her mate then comes on and says ,we're only being playful'. This conversation seems to be dominated by unfunny bullies. I thought Mumsnet was a place to come for people who want advice or support in any area. Why do people need to join in a conversation only to be unpleasant with nothing constructive to say?

Rafaella some people on here are just plain horrible and bullies themselves that is why they make horrible comments like that and then all their mates come and agree with them, they contact each other via msn and then come on and copy each other.
I think that if a child is bright and knows the answers to questions in class they will be bullied the g&t list won't change that

just imagine the whole thing in reversal:
someone is posting about their child on the special needs boards as s/he has ADHD. someone comes onto the thread and says 'ADHD? your kid's just thick and rude'
It's ridiculous!!!!!

I very very much doubt anyone will be posting on this topic to boast - and if they do then we shouldn't bother replying. this topic is for kids like jenk1's ds and his horrible experience; for parents who aren't what g&t is by the school's definition and would like more info about what to expect in the way of input; for parents who would like to know how to support a child who is gifted, etc.

I hate bullying like this. it's not funny and it's really narrow-minded

should say 'who aren't sure what g&t is'

Laugh away hmc and I will indeed carry on thinking as I do. The thinking is a little more sophisticated than assuming any criticism surrounding this subject is motivated by sour grapes, but I believe some is.

Thanks for your comments Rafella and Moomin.
I did wonder after the "jerk1" message that i was perceived as bragging about DS which i certainly am not.
I just wanted to give another view of the whole G&T-that its not always proud parents bragging about their children and that this is what can sometimes happen to children that are labelled G&T through no fault of their own.

Actually, can i just clarify something (Rafaella?) ...I said Rhubarb was being "playful" not we. I didnt think it was particularly funny either hence my swift reply.

Jenk - i really feel for you and your DS. I fully understand how it is to be bullied because of being perceived to be "bright/teachers pet".

jenk1, I too was really sorry to see that remark about your chat name.
People in your position need a G & T Scheme forum to talk about your experiences, please don't be put off by all this ill-informed sniping :(

I agree with Marina

And meant to say (have been trying to post on here all morning after reading with interest last night)
thought-provoking contributions as usual from Scummy and tigermoth, and mb too. Tend to agree with frogs that all the life-enhancing experiences outside school are not going to compensate for the bad learning experiences that some children have in the classroom :(
And wish I shared scummy's confidence that all children have easy access to quality library provision (ie within walking distance and offering a good range of up-to-date age-appropriate printed non-fiction as well as ranks of People's Network terminals).
School library provision at primary and even secondary level is disgracefully patchy.

Thanks for your earlier reply jenk- unfortunately I thought that might be the case, Don't you think the best thing (but too underresourced i know) would be for every child to be able to work at their level. That's why I love ds1's school, every child follows their own timetable, let alone curriculum.

Are you going to home ed jenk? There are lots of good online courses etc now, and in the future (teens) places like the OU can sometimes be persuaded to take on people under 18.

marina, my dear, do you know anything about felting? and moulded felting in partic

the way this thread has gone has been very interesting really and actually proves a point - most kids i teach know that it's out of order to be racist and sexist- they'll jump on anyone who makes a racist comment, grass them up, tell them off, etc. [Kids still have a bit of a problem with homophobia, obviously as they're still so unsure of sexuality in general and they mainly want to conform, so there is still some homophobic bullying that is seen as 'fair game' by many kids.]

But by far the most 'ok' bullying in kids' eyes is that of picking on 'boffins' - to the extent that some schools now have policies and very pro-active attempts to promote positive reactions to high achievers. I read a prospectus just yesterday where one of their 'mission statements' was that 'it's cool to achieve'.

Aren't some posters just conforming to this very base instinct that we try to educate children out of - picking on achievers??!! We haven't even defined what we perceive g&t to mean as it changes from school to school, but many posters have just assumed it means 'genius' and this they have associated with pushy, boastful parents; miserable kids who are unable to function in 'normal' society and a good reason to slag other posters off!

I'm finding all this a very interesting exercise in anthropology!

mb, "sarky and snippy" topic - love it!! (Well, of course obviously I don't love the sarking and snipping - all of that is at best a petty mean-spiritedness that life is just too short for - isn't it?)

I just wanted to stand up and be counted on this thread against the carpers and in support of those who are struggling with whatever makes school difficult and unhappy.