That glass ceiling! Part 2

[var123]

Continuing the discussion about artificial limits placed on G&T children, and the resulting impact on their health and happiness (not to mention futures).

Do they really matter less because they have a perceived "advantage"?!

original thread here:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/gifted_and_talented/2507232-The-glass-ceiling-for-very-able-children?

I hear you var. I really do.

Regarding homework marking, I really loved ds's reception teacher. She always written lots of encouraging comments, and one comment about stretching brains with drawing( head with lots of arrows going outwards), we still talk about it.
This year, just a tick, no marking. I sometimes question what's the point of having a homework.

WoodHeaven said it exactly!

(The Level 7 stuff was great, but short lived an down to a really devoted teacher who has highly able DC of her own so can empathise. Ds hoovered it up though, so it was never going to be sustainable but it was nice while it lasted. I just can't believe that his target this year is level 6a though. Its sooo not a target!)

Dc1 is a 7c because they had to take into account his sats results.
But his math teacher is reluctant to teach him at that level, even though he has proven he has mastered that level (95% at level 6)....

It seems we have our dcs in two very very similar schools :(

opioneers, and I can see that from the academic point of view the highly selective school with similar peers solves the problem that DS's teacher mentioned of him missing from experiencing the spark and friendly competition that comes from working with peers that are in the same level as him in Maths.

But from the social point of view, there is no guarantee that other children also reading chapter books in Y1 would be into the same things as your DD or my DS. The friends that he spent the most time playing games in the playground were not the few ones reading chapter books like him. He is a lot into Harry Potter (has seen all the movies) because I am a big fan. He hasn't read the books yet because I am waiting for the right moment to start reading them with him. He also has seen all the Hobbit and Lord of the Rings films because DH and I like those a lot. And for a while in Y1 all the children were playing LOTR games in the playground even though I doubt any of them has read the books.

Anyway, I'm glad your DD was able to finally enjoy sharing Harry Potter with her friends and having a nice HP party in Y4 :)

Ellle, same here! I'm a big Harry Potter fan and have all the books and films, my ds never read them until this year.
He is loving it now. I'm glad I waited until he is mature enough to appreciate the book.

Bertrand, I do appreciate what you're saying, but in a way the HP thing is just an example; at the same time she also had a very different attention span and so often found playing quite frustrating, as she thought a game was just starting and they would get bored and do something else. We solved the problem by facilitating closer friendships out of school.

Elle, I agree, but she would have more of a chance, I still believe, in a more selective environment.

DC who are way ahead of their age group intellectually can miss out on imaginative play with peers because their stimuli aren't in sync.

Dc1 is a 7c because they had to take into account his sats results. But his math teacher is reluctant to teach him at that level, even though he has proven he has mastered that level (95% at level 6)

Entirely understandable. This is why it is problematic to accelerate DC beyond the system they are in. Top set students come in on a level 6. However, there will not be enough of them who have mastered all the level 6 material to assume level 6 knowledge, so it needs to be consolidated instead of just steaming ahead with level 7 (remember the issues with acceleration leading to gaps in knowledge). A student cannot be taught level 7 topics in a class which is being taught level 6 (unless given a textbook and told to get on with it), because it's not like other subjects where level 7 is an extension of level 6, they are different topics. Angles in parallel lines versus Pythagoras (or whatever).

However it is possible to give bright students hard questions based on the level 6 material which will challenge them without teaching them level 7 stuff. Some parents don't get this and think that they must be standing still if they aren't climbing the level ladder.

noble I see the point you're trying to make. But if a child is very able it just isn't possible to keep them on ks2 at primary without boring them senseless. Of course there are lots of none nc maths things you can do, however it gets to a point when going ahead is the only way to provide maths at a suitable level. No y7 teacher was ever going to give dd hard questions based on l6 material. That ship has sailed. I don't disagree it's possible for bright students, but for very able kids, it's just more mindless repitition.

I realise an entire y7 top set won't be at that level, therefore the teacher can't just pitch the lesson at that level. But no reason dc in that category can't just be given a textbook and left to crack on, alongside problems at that level (whatever it is) and none nc maths.

Spot on Bobo - that is why I moved DS to his current school. I got tired of coming to pick DS up and seeing him in the corner alone with the building equipment because he had no interest in football and none of the other boys were interested in recreating battle scenes from the Peloponnesian Wars.

7c at the end of KS2 isn't so extraordinary as to require special provision, IME. I agree there are children out there who can't be provided for in the normal classroom experience, but I've only met 1 in 10 years of teaching.

There are issues with giving a textbook and telling them to crack on too. 1) Modern textbooks are crap. Seriously. 2) We are talking about Y7s, who usually don't have the skills/maturity to organise their own learning. 3) Being isolated in the classroom isn't great for social integration. 4) This only perpetuates the issue.

Many of my first year maths university students (coming in with A stars) have gaps in basic material. They could definitely have done with more repetition, not less, throughout KS3, KS4 and KS5. Very, very few students seem to be so terrifically solid in maths that they can answer deeper questions on it, and use it automatically without thinking in multiple set problems.

I am also involved in masterclasses for secondary school students who do well in UKMT and BMO. Again these students are meant to be the very top at maths in the country, but have astonishing gaps and often superficial understanding of topics.

Personally I wouldn't send my own DC to a school that was rushing students onto level 7/8 material in year 7, even if the school was superselective with students coming in at level 6 maths. This is not what I think will be beneficial in the long run.

I understand acceleration is not the answer.
My ds was doing ncetm assessment material, the link from teacherwith2kids on the part1 of this thread. "Mastery with Greater Depth" section was great, even though he know the concept already, it is quite challenging to explain the reasoning behind the answer etc. I just wish the school would give him things like this in class.

I agree with disquisitiones that repetition is important for mastery. It's something that parents of gifted children often complain about when it comes to schoolwork, yet I've never met a parent who doesn't accept that often tedious amounts of repetition and practice are essential for success in other fields, like sport and music.

It's possible for teachers to reinforce topics by giving more difficult problems or questions, without necessarily advancing a level, or teaching next year's curriculum. My children's best maths teachers have often set interesting homework that requires serious reflection - DD had an one last weekend which posed an interesting logical problem. It wasn't "difficult" in the sense of requiring advanced maths techniques, or straying outside the Y11 programe, but it made her think.

Can it be that the only way forward is to teach all those gifted in a certain subject together.
You may have older and younger children together for that subject, but for their other subjects be just with their own age group.
I may be pessimistic but I don't think state schools and tbh most private schools can deal with children so far ahead.
It can have a huge detrimental effect on the rest of their schooling if they don't receive the right support/ level of education in the subject they are gifted.
Finally, my dd has come to terms with the fact that some things won't just be easy, she needs to work, seek help and not just ignore problems.
I'm convinced the perspective has come from being with children who are either better than her in her gifted subject, or less advanced.
She has worked with them all and seen that other children have differing levels in all sorts of different subjects.
It has given her the confidence to tackle Maths and not stick her head in the sand, hoping it will go away.

BTW in my own DC's schools children who were scoring close to 100% at level 6 maths in year 5/6 would typically get from 60-100% on Common Entrance/Scholarship papers for private schools, i.e. on harder papers many of them were not demonstrating mastery of level 5/6 topics.

Similarly in year 7/8/9 (of a superselective) the school uses their own assessments which are far more challenging than standard KS3 papers. A number of children came in at year 7 from state primaries declaring themselves to be at level 7 maths. The school did not agree and indeed these children often performed worse in "deeper" level 5/6 assessments than children coming in from the feeder prep schools.

I do think a lot of the issues being discussed in this thread are entwined with other issues in education - pressure on teachers to meet specific targets, high workloads for teachers so not enough time to prepare differentiated work etc etc.

Giving a couple of simple fraction questions as homework to year 7 students would not be challenging for many students, not just for students who are particularly "gifted". This illustrates that homework and presumably class teaching is not being sufficiently differentiated. Many secondary school maths teachers don't seem to be aware of the many resources available for extending high ability students, or don't have time/energy to integrate them into their lessons. Unfortunately a lot of secondary school maths teachers are not specialists in maths and don't really have the background to be confident about using extension work either.

Don't confuse working at a topic with mindless repitition.

I remember dd endlessly doing column method (by choice, at home) and constantly writing sheets of sums for her, before she started making her own. Yes that repitition helped her, and as she was the one asking to do it, it clearly didn't bore her. Because at that time, it was sufficiently challenging it didn't bore her. If she'd first met it at the age it's taught at primary, and been asked to do that level of repitition, it would have been mindless.

Exactly like the repitition of a preschool book is stimulating and enjoyable when you're little. But mindless repitition if you got older, able readers to read that same 2 minute book over and over again.

It's so mentally deadening.

I also think we lose a lot of the most able before anyone can judge whether they have gaps in their knowledge in their gifted area.

I do wonder why some parents of able children get so upset at the idea of their children helping others. Surely this is one of the best ways to make shore that they don't have any of the "gaps" disquitiones is talking about? Obviously they shouldnMt be doing it all th time, but it really seems to be an issue for some parents.

Actually I fully agree with both noble and disqui.
But, I would expect a 94% meaning a deep understanding of the subject. I would not expect that a superficial knowledge would allow student to get that sort of marks.

So what you are actually saying is that students get A* marks/100% results, leading them to think they have mastered the subject when actually they haven't.
If these students have already got 100% marks, how are teachers evaluating the 'deeper' understanding and how are students able to know whether they have indeed mastered all there is? How do you measure progression?

Working at a deeper level and been told of what is expected is what I would like to see.

I don't think that helping other children helps in anyway to fill the gaps we are talking about.
At best, it helps the student to show he has a real understanding of the concept, not that they can apply to it to all sorts of different situations.

Helping for a few minutes as a community minded activity is fine. Dressed up as educational and in place of suitable work isn't.

Not to mention that until they also have sufficient maturity, unless dc are reasonably similar ability then it's more likely they'd just confuse a child of lower ability to themselves.

Bertrand - it's discriminatory to use pupils as teaching assistants.

In a sense I pay fees (and work hard enough to be able to afford them) to buy high expectations, although there are a good few London state grammars with high expectations too and some comps.

On peers I felt quite different at school. I was a year young, most girls did not go to university(small private school) and my essays were read to everyone in class etc etc - there was really no one like me in the class at all, in the whole year. I got the best A levels in the school, university prizes etc. So perhaps I should have gone to a selective private school and am glad my children have. I don't remember the school asking me to help others ever but I did like explaining things in a way people could understand. I still see that as one of my strengths as a lawyer and when I give talks whereas some people cannot. Perhaps it was the experience at school of doing that for friends which helped.

Also a lot of these issues depend where you live. Some parts of the country have one secondary school only locally and that's it - not much choiuce but go somehwere like Manchester or London and you'll have a range of choices.

I am not a fan to too much homework - my daughter had none in holidays at North London Coll. and that was a nice scheme but some homework is good. It prepares you for having to get your finger out at university without someone pressing you. It allows parents to check how the child is doing. You need it in the hard subjects where some actual effort is needed like learning your lists of verbs and vocab in foreign languages which is why lazier children avoid languages as they need real work.

On Harry Potter etc even at selective schools children differ. My second at her school interview they could not find a book she couldn't read when nearly 4. Her older sister was not an early reader. Both are now London city lawyers earning quite a bit. It was just the second one sat still and concentrated at 3 and 4 and the older one was always moving.