Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Gifted and talented

Talk to other parents about parenting a gifted child on this forum.

Original poster

like cod

358 replies

cod · 15/05/2006 13:17

arf at this section

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

OP posts:
Jimjamskeepingoffvaxthreads · 21/05/2006 12:19

sorry missed out the final sentence- and there woudl be no need for a label that actually means very little and translates into even less.

peachyClair · 21/05/2006 12:28

That makes a lot of sense Jimjanmns.

Where I think the current sit falls apart is that kids are labelled as either or. DS1 struggles hugely with some stuff (esp reading), but his langauge age is 4 years above his chronological age. As a result he is a middler at school and can access neither the appropriate SN stuff, or the appropriate G and T stuff (eg, drama, or he is excellent at poetry if someone else scribes for him).

Blandmum · 21/05/2006 12:32

Totaly agree with you JJ.

Small classes in MS and real alternative education for those with more pronounced SN, with integration where appropriate is the key.

There is no G and T program in my kids school. With classes of 14 they can get all the extra stimulation that they need. Dd gets that where appropriate. ds gets all the additional help that he needs since his is very much at the 'bottom' of the class for all manner of things. But his class (10 kids) can cope with him, and he gets withdrawn for 2 hours of 1 to 1 with the SENCO each week.

THis is what should happen everywhere, but it doesn't Angry Sad

Blandmum · 21/05/2006 12:37

Notwhithstanading my concerns at the governmants g and t, I still think that people who want to ask for help regarding their kids percieved needs should be left alone, and not hounded.

I am the most unsporty person in the world. If either of my kids was sporty I would like to think that I could post here for advice, since I am totaly witless in this regard.

If someone posts and says, 'Look ds is a great reader, and I don't know what books to steer him towards' people post all sorts of sarky 'My little Algernon' comments.

The sport thing would be OK, but not the books.

When people posted about this sort of stuff on Education they got teased, behaviour, ditto. So now they have their own topic, and people still have to get in a dig. Why?

If you are not interested, or think that people are up their own arses, stay away.

We all have a range of places we 'go' on MN and areas that we are just not interested.

A discusion on the governents G and T policy is totaly valid, intereting and thought provoking. But the sniping is just plain nasty.

More of the former and less of the latter please.

Jimjamskeepingoffvaxthreads · 21/05/2006 12:40

watch the film mb!

Blandmum · 21/05/2006 12:41

Sorry, I'm failing my g and t test hereGrin

What film???

tigermoth · 21/05/2006 12:45

I agree with scummymummy's view here:

"In some ways I'd have fewer problems with it if it was honestly about identifying and supporting the fewer than 1% of kids who are totally off the scale in academic ability terms. But in practice it does seem to be more about giving opportunities to the ordinarily able that should be a routine part of the curriculum anyway (and doing nothing for their characters in the process.)"

Now I cannot speak from a huge amount of in-school experience. For all I know, in the classroom it might work for everyone if the top 10% of children go off on G and T enrichment programmes. But looking at how my son has been dipping in and out of the G and T group throughout his school days, scummymummy's views make a lot of sense to me.

I hope, Cod, that you will explain your anti G and T views more fully - as a school govenor and ex teacher you must have clear reasons to be against this label.

FWIW, I think 'bored children' is a much better thread title than 'gifted and talented'. I have no problem at all with having a topic about children who do not fit in with normal school expectations.

zippitippitoes · 21/05/2006 12:47

Round pegs and square holes is the old fashioned expression which occurs to me

Blandmum · 21/05/2006 12:48

I like that! Grin

Covers a nice range of different needs as well

tigermoth · 21/05/2006 12:53

yes, I like that, too!

Jimjamskeepingoffvaxthreads · 21/05/2006 12:55

link in my 12.08 post mb

ScummyMummy · 21/05/2006 12:55

Ouch re: freedom of speech, batters and mb. (Keep wanting to put H in front of the mb still!) I hope I haven't sniped- I haven't intended to do so at any rate. I suppose I reluctantly concede that if people want a gifted and talented section they should have one. I don't like the label at all but if others do then that's their prerogative, I guess. I do hate all this dividing and dividing and dividing though- in the community and on the internet. We seem to need to categorise and divide and not mix ever more and ever more rather than aiming to have a great system that everyone can access but within which difference is valued. Mumsnet mirrors society, I guess.

Blandmum · 21/05/2006 13:00

I'm all for freedom of speech, but tongue in cheek, the MN philosophy and all that! Grin

and I wasn't habing a pop at you scummy

more this sort of post

'no modesty at all

oh get over yourself
my kdi is so clevr
he will never be happy
do you ever htink you are projecting just '

Which I don;t think is adding anything helpful to what could be a rather intereting debate

yoyo · 21/05/2006 13:02

Thanks for the link JimJams - will wait for a quiet time later so that I can watch it without interruption. I am so pleased that this thread has moved on to discuss the issues and label rather than personalising G&T. I think your posts are very sensible by the way and agree with your "If I were in charge" paragraph.
The challenge is for all children to receive the education they need and the label would be unnecessary if this was the case.

Saggarmakersbottomknocker · 21/05/2006 13:06

Cod, much as you dislike it, you are gifted & talented - at posting a sarcy, throwaway comment which sparks a really interesting debate. Grin

zippitippitoes · 21/05/2006 13:11

I think the national curriculum has a lot to answer for in that it is prescriptive and doesn't necessarily allow for the best teaching to take place.

I like the imaginative leaps and sparky connections from one topic to another rather than building blocks and maybe that is sometimes what children find boring.

batters · 21/05/2006 13:14

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

ScummyMummy · 21/05/2006 13:29

Phew, batters!:)
Love the autism speaks film, jj.

Blandmum · 21/05/2006 13:32

And TWIW I also agree with most that has been posted about g and t. I just don't like the sarky comments much. We could always ask for a 'bitches' topic I suppoe. Or Sarky and Snippy it could be called. people could go there are post and we feeble types could avoid it Grin

I'm waiting until the kids go to bed JJ so I can concentrate on the film.

ScummyMummy · 21/05/2006 13:39

A bitches topic? ShockGrin I bet that would be a busy topic actually- especially if it was in a secret thread!

Blandmum · 21/05/2006 13:42

Well, it would clear the decks in the rest of MN Grin

If someone became overwhelmed with the urge to snipe at someone, we could send them there!

Re your posts, I honestly think that you have made a lot of sense. And catagorisation can be a right royal PITA, but as batters has said, MN is getting bigger.

God, I can still remember the fuss about 'chat' [sigh emoticon....god that makes me feel old]

ScummyMummy · 21/05/2006 13:51

Oh me too! I must- gulp- be a conservative (with a small c I hasten to add) because I remember being anti-chat too, though certainly not as fanatically anti as some.

batters · 21/05/2006 13:52

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

roisin · 21/05/2006 14:23

My secondary school does have a G&T scheme, though it hasn't been running long and is very much in the early stages.

But I think most staff recognise that it is necessary because we are failing some of the brightest kids - i.e they come in with good SATs from primary school and in many subjects don't make a great deal of progress, particularly in yr7 and 8, and many are put off education completely. They never have to persevere or strive with difficult work, because they find "the standard" easy to achieve.

In most subjects we have classes of between 28 and 33, complete mixed ability. IMO even the most superb teachers cannot suitably challenge the top 5% and bottom 5% in that situation. (And the top 5% in our school are not very top iyswim.)

The justification for mixed ability is sound: educationally the children can be a help and inspiration to each other and learn from each other; and behaviourally mixed setting tends to spread out the "challenges".

But for both of these justifications it is clear that the more able children are contributing far more than they are benefiting, which hardly seems fair.

So the G&T scheme is to attempt to go some way towards addressing that.

yoyo · 21/05/2006 15:22

Roisin (deviating from thread with apologies) - has the school always been completely mixed ability? Have the children progressed as expected (according to the CAT3/MidYis results)? Just wondering whether the effect is measurable.