The glass ceiling for very able children

[var123]

Has anyone else encountered the sense that the school is merely paying lip service to the ideals that they will challenge all children and work to bring all the children in the class to their potential?

I bumped along it a couple of days ago in a face to face conversation with one of the teacher's at my children's secondary.

He was full of buzzwords (like resilience and challenge) but there was a complete vacuum when it came to detail about how he planned to achieve that wrt to my children. In fact, he kept lapsing into telling me how my DC might help the others "by inspiring the less able".

Honestly, has there ever been a human being born into this world, who feels inspired to keep ploughing away at something due to being in the presence of someone who learned to do it without breaking stride?? People who struggle and then succeed are the inspiring ones because they make you feel like if you can do it, then maybe you can too. The ones who always find it easy and are just waiting for you to catch up so they can move on are just disheartening to contemplate.

Btw, we have talked a lot about Maths here - is this a problem solely within maths? What about budding poets / linguists / scientists / artists?

Bert

I too agree with you. The most able child at any subject will want to pursue their talent into H.E and will need good A levels and GCSE's.
Even the conservatoires that dd has her eyes on require them, but obviously not necessarily A's in Physics. She will still need 5 GCSE's and 2 A levels in relative subjects.
She knows that Maths will be a challenge and extra effort will need to be applied for her to obtain at least a C grade, or whatever it is now.

At school they do a full day until about 7.30 sometimes 8pm but during this time they do academic subjects, individual music lessons, ensemble rehearsals, prep and have a long lunch where they either perform in concerts or attend other children's concerts. My dd and I'm sure others too have time to see teachers for extra direction/ help in areas where they may struggle.
Most evenings they have an hour to go swimming, walk, games in the common room etc.
They also have time to pop out to shops or Starbucks etc.

There is a particular problem with maths because answering harder maths questions well doesn't improve with maturity in the same way that analysing texts or writing poetry does. Bright children in maths are not held back by immaturity.

I deliberately chose a non-core academic thing (Cello-playing) for the fictional gifted tennis player to learn, because it goes without saying that they would get at least a basic academic education irrespective of their interests.

var, but why? Every adult will benefit from a skill that they can earn their living by (whether that be academic or practical), an activity that keeps them physically fit, and a hobby to relax. So a gifted mathematician will benefit from having been given a certain level of skill in a sport or physical activity, and the basis for a hobby, in the course of their education. Equally a sports person will benefit from a basic level of academic training, and a hobby to relax with.

(And my academy-player-at-local-professional-football-club learned a musical instrument, as part of his 'at least try everything for a while'. Which was great, because when his early football promise stalled, he had another 'thing' ready to take its place)

Correct me if I am wrong but, I don't think anyone is arguing that DC should follow the curriculum at school, that provides a basic level fo education. What's being debated is how they spend their leisure time.

Gifted tennis players only become so by devoting an unusually large number of hours to playing tennis.
Gifted musicians are the same.

No one says that they should not pursue their interests.

However, if you have a strong interest in science or maths (which neither of my DC do btw), then why should you be forced to spend your leisure time not exploring your interests too?

Noble, so it begs the question - to what extent should 'provision for gifted children' be driven by the specific issue around Maths, and to what extent should we value 'development of maturity and the skills / abilities that come with that' though perhaps this may slightly retard the development of some specifically gifted mathematicians?

Or do we take 'early promise in Maths' as a potential 'indicator of general high ability' - a canary that might prompt us as teachers to respond, not with Maths acceleration specifically, but with generalised provision for that child as a potentially able child who is currently expressing that ability in Maths because it is an 'available avenue' at their current age?

But even if you have the most well rounded gifted child imaginable, this still doesn't solve the problem that they are - at best - treading water in some lessons and that this is seen as an acceptable thing to happen.

Good tennis players are given tuition at their level, as are good cello players; it's only in academic subjects that sitting in a classroom going over stuff that you already know, for more hours of a day than you do anything else, is seen to be OK.

Oh, and my favourite ever bit of research on the subject concluded that gifted children actually learned less in science with greater repetitions of the material...

new my dd is the opposite. Below average in musical ability, although I know it's harder to quantify. Just comparing dd with kids who don't have your dds talent, but are still high achievers in the broad sense. Dds music ability goes as far as it can with quick thinking, good memory and no problem co-ordinating the physical movements. All of which mask her actual low ability, and leave her looking just below average. I encouraged her to try, hence knowing she just isn't made that way, and as long as she found it fun that was fine.

Unfortunately, the state system wants your dd to learn the same as mine in both music and maths, and that can't be of any use to either of them.

I'm not sure you can apply the logic about non academic kids having to do both to the academic kids. We shouldn't be making talented artists stick with crayons and an age related colouring book, or making the talented tennis player listen to 45 minutes explaining the aim of the game and how to hold a racquet. Or making news dd listen to a lesson on what basic musical notes look like either

var, the point that I was making is that the argument on this thread has been about how gifted children spend their time in school, and more specifically in Maths lessons in school.

A gifted musician or sports person or dancer spends all their hours in school not doing 'their thing'. Any lessons that do tangentially touch on their area of giftedness (school PE or school music lessons) are accepted to be 'not at their level', and most PE lessons will not be in their sport. 'Their thing' is, except for the few able to access full time specialist education, done in the remaining hours of the day.

Conversely, a gifted mathematician spends several hours a week in school doing 'their thing'. It is expected that lessons that are about their 'area of giftedness' should be very closely matched to, indeed constantly extend, their ability. They may choose to, but do not have to, do anything else connected with 'their thing' outside core school hours.

Imagine what this thread would be like if every school turned round and sad 'Actually, as you are good at Maths, we know we will not be teaching you Maths in maths lessons, so you'll have to just muck in at a variety of things during Maths lessons. Some of it might not be Maths - we need to do a variety of lessons for you in those slots. We may occasionally set up Maths competitions for you, and when you do well, we will boast about it in the school magazine. Oh, and you must spend 2-3 hours every night, and at least 1 full day every weekend, doing Maths that we don't teach in school, and we will expect you to pay for it, as well as arranging residential Maths weeks in most holidays.'

var

I know exactly what you mean. I don't know many gifted Mathematicians but dd friend will play maths games and puzzles all her leisure time if you'd let her.
She even asked me for dd Maths books when I had bought the wrong level when she was H.ed
They were really hard, dd saw them and never in a million years, but her friend whipped through them in no time. They were those Schofield and Simms, the highest level and the child was year 5 at the time.
Her parents are lovely but only see the importance of her being good at childcare, her ambition is to be a hair dresser, nothing wrong with this but her Maths is a different level all together. I feel sad this child won't be challenged and directed to use her gift.
I try my best but it falls on deaf ears I'm afraid.

"Good tennis players are given tuition at their level, as are good cello players; it's only in academic subjects that sitting in a classroom going over stuff that you already know, for more hours of a day than you do anything else, is seen to be OK."

But that 'good tuition' is NOT during core school hours, in normal PE / Music lessons. DD in a school dance lesson? DS in a primary school football lesson? Absolutely not 'tuition at their level' - that was all done outside school.

It's a much smaller part of the curriculum though, so the potential for raging boredom is much less, I think. Although your DC may not agree, and I'm prepared to believe that.

But your description above of maths is very much what happened to me in lessons during various bits of my secondary education, at least the in-school bit of it. Lessons were very rarely extended to my ability (and in fact I was told not to come to one aspect of my A Level classes as the teacher could not teach me).

And, not that this matters hugely, I don't think that maths necessarily works as a flag for giftedness. It can do, but DD is, despite the maturity issues, much more ahead in literacy than maths.

Just checked DD's timetable. She has 6 hours of Maths lessons a fortnight, and 5 of PE...

And an average of 24 hours a fortnight of after-school dance, her 'thing' (though she's well into the '1 in 100' level of ability - top of top set - for Maths, English, and Art as well)

I also don't think maths ability at an older age is a flag for giftedness. I was pondering whether it was in very young children, who have fewer 'other' ways to express their ability IYSWIM.

DS was an exceptionally able early mathematician, but as he grows and matures, it is actually history and languages in which he is choosing, and is able, to express his ability fully.

(Equally the very able mathematician i referred to earlier is not choosing to do Maths at university, preferring a joint degree that offers 'depth of meaning' as well as 'hard abstract calculation')

Teacher

I hear you loud and clear and this was the reason dd opted for H.ed for a while.
The school day was full of things she needed to do because she was told she had to learn them all.
There weren't enough hours in the day to do the things she wanted to do with music.
There were so many opportunities she had to miss because of school and this is what she struggled to understand. She knew exactly what she needed and wanted to do and her words "School gets in the way".

I know we were lucky to find her new school and how fortunate she is etc.
But really, if for some reason it doesn't work out our only option would be to H.ed again.

This is why I'm convinced that schools should exist for all subjects where a child is G&T, specialised Maths or Science schools where yes, all other subjects are covered but the emphasis on the subject is carried through the school and allowances made for this subject to dominate all others.

I know this is only our experience, but this was also the case in Yr1. DD was top set maths, good but not brilliant, but 4+ years ahead in literacy.

Some of this, though I think is because a lot of school maths is arithmetic rather than mathematical thinking, and she may get better as she gets older (she does very well at NVR for example). I was not outstanding at primary and still don't know my times tables properly, but did further maths at A Level.

And yes, re the hours. What does she do in PE? Are there things she can't do for risk of injury?

DD's education is something of a compromise.

She is highly academically able (an 'all Level 6s at the end of primary' type child), a gifted artist, a pretty decent netball player and a very able dancer (she would have a reasonable expectation of being a finalist in a national competition her teacher has entered her into, for example).

Dancing is something that may stop at 18 - most 'local' dance schools only cater for up to that age - or may go on full-time with a view to a career, via dance college. That route is open to her, as several girls a year go down that route from her dance school.

However, we ruled out residential dance school from the age of 11, because the academic provision isn't quite good enough and DD is not convinced that dancing is 'the career for her', despite loving it.

Academically, she passed for a superselective single sex grammar some miles away, but she goes to the excellent local mixed comprehensive. We know it can help her gain the grades she is capable of, and the destination universities are great. Perhaps she would have done a little better at the grammar, but with the bus and other commitments that might well have compromised her dancing.

In terms of sport, she does the full range at school, because high level dance won't be available to her as a 'pure hobby' once she has left school, whereas sport is very much more accessible and i think will remain important to her. She trialled for county netball a while back: fortunately she had an 'off day' - it was a rest day in a local dance competition, I think her mind was on other things - so we haven't had to face that!

Oh, and she plays the cello. Not very well. She is finding it VERY instructive to be not very good at something....

The problem with the 'all specialist schools' route is that it leaves someone like my DD having to make an early choice about which of her 'specialisms' she would choose to focus on. As t is, we can keep most of them going through a combination of comprehensive school and local community provision, though I am constantly aware that via this route we are shaving a little bit off what she could be achieving in any sphere.

*I'm not convinced I agree that the 'top most able' have no holes in their basic skills.

In fact I disagree based on meeting those young people at least two days a week grin.

Perhaps maths is different? disquit could answer that.*

The people I work with everyday would be called the "top most able" in mathematics. Yet they have significant gaps in basic (GCSE/A level) mathematics despite having A stars in Maths and FM (and STEP papers, UKMT experience). Frequently they do not do mathematical operations sufficiently automatically and fluently, indicating that they have not been asked to practise them enough and that they are not solid enough to use them accurately in multistep questions. I have direct experience with prospective Oxbridge candidates in STEP classes; maths undergraduates at various top UK universities and maths PhD students with firsts from top universities. (Gaps and weaknesses in basic manipulations are still very much noticeable amongst the latter.)

Despite having A stars in most or all GCSE subjects, the standard of the written work of maths undergraduates and postgraduates at top universities is also often appalling. For example, they often write separate sentences separated by commas and have no idea how to write formal "business" English.

teacher

I think if dd had been academic as in level 6's and wanted to continue dance, we wouldn't have gone down the specialist route either.
However, at 9 she decided to stop dance as something had to give and I would have to have paid for her missing lessons. it was tough though as she loved it and had started at 2.5.
I think she realised she would never be a dancer but music was where her heart was.
She was good, but not in your dd league.

Mine enjoys sport as well, but mostly Hockey. She would join our county team if she wasn't at school, but is happy to just do it during P.E at school.

For us, the specialism was right as she wanted to give up her other commitments and hobbies in order to concentrate on music.
I'm not sure it would have worked if she had resented or decided to keep other things on.

There are those who take a different route at dd school and every year there are leaving destinations to uni's to study medicine, law, science etc. However, they certainly aren't the norm, there are only a handful at most.

I'm constantly surprised by the results they gain as the emphasis isn't on academic subjects. Either the school attracts a high percentage of able children or they manage to teach better due to small classes and teachers being on hand more, I'm not sure. They are well up in the top schools though, not the very best but 77th out of 100 top schools in one category.

disquisitiones- what i have noticed is that my DC may be able to do mental maths faster than I can put it in the calculator, but they have absolutely no idea how to layout a calculation. There is little or no use of "therefore", or "this implies" or "is a member of" or any of the other nomenclature than make maths readable and the solutions easy to follow.
They scribble a bit here and then they scribble a bit there and then they scribble another calculation somewhere else, and then (my personal bugbear) they do those thoroughly annoying grid calculations in another bit of the paper, and then hey presto they put in the answer in the pre-printed box.

I often feel - and have asked the schools - that if they cannot or will not teach my Dc something new, then could they not at least encourage them to develop the skill or laying out their answers in a coherent way whilst doing yet more examples of something that they already know?

"Frequently they do not do mathematical operations sufficiently automatically and fluently, indicating that they have not been asked to practise them enough"

That is really interesting. As a primary teacher, our most frequent complaint from parents of above-average mathematicians comes when we ask them to practise written calculation methods that 'they can already do'. (The next most common is that 'they are STILL doing addition of 3 digit numbers, they can DO that', when we have moved beyond teaching for fluency and are looking at reasoning, application and problem solving.)

It's as if 'the formal written methods' for operations are the marker for being good at maths but 'don't need practice once learned'.

EricNorthman - A-levels are cheap to deliver. Certainly cheaper than IB and cheaper than French bac. So there is also going to be a lot of reticence to change for budgetary reasons alone.