Shitty shite: Gifted & Talented

[MamaG]

shite

I was brought up to believe I was 'gifted an talented'

Nothing could convince me otherwise

I'm not of course, I'm fairly bright and quite good with words and creative concepts, I can convince other people of my viewpoint .. it all stems from my confidence I suppose

BUT and I say this carefully if there had been a huge focus on 'g&t' at my schools I am fairly certain I would have a totally different attitude to my own abilities because I doubt I would have qualified .. so instead of growing up believing I was bright and ending up with a good degree from a red-brick uni, I could easily have felt less bright than some of my peers who were actually asked to sit for Oxbridge (didn't know anything about it at the time)

I think there should be work to the child's abilities available in all classes but I don't think a big and segmented category should be well-publicised because the knock on the very bright kids then to the bright kids then to the above average kids etc would worry me intensely

oh i dunno

I HATE the g+t stuff. I really do

I HATE the sporting stuff also

I suppose i think kids should just get their basic work done, and then be free to roam, or read, or climb trees as they see fit, not be continually pushed to suceed in the great race of life.

but my god sobernow what foul women! How RUDE!

I have one with SN and one who is G&T and I really don't understand why loads of extra effort is needed with G&T. He's being stretched quite enough at school. It's easy peezy to stretch him anyway; go to a museum, join a library. I really dont get it. Anyone who thinks its remotely like getting adequate provision for a child with complex SN really has no idea.

Personally I think the money should go into supporting social & economic needs- that would be a far better pay off. And yes support G&T students in areas with social problems (where G&T might mean getting 5 GCSEs). Support all children. I don't think schemes are really the answer. A bit of setting would do the trick equally well. Then teachers could teach at the relevant level.

we're not allowed setting in modern education though

nor are we allowed anything that seems to make ruddy common sense

You are right, Filly. Kids are being tested to perdition and back. We won't produce any brighter kids as a result, just knackered ones.

Yet I still say that something needs to be done about clever children .. I'm sure we're all agreed about that. But what? (and I take your points on board, Xenia). You are in a position to afford appropriate education, but as you know, many of us are not, which leaves us with a problem.

Kerrymum (and others on this thread), you're right. We should be able to extol the intelligence of our children, but unfortunately, society at large disapproves. It's considered 'bad form.' So we must continue to burst

The idea of Gifted & Talented^ is OK if that's all we're left with. The monika is not. G&T (as I stated in an earlier thread), is Gin & Tonic.

oh FGS, so setting isn';t allowed, but instead we have to identify the top whatever % in the school then spend money (which would be better spent on SN- sorry but it would- many children with SN aren't getting an education at all because of lack of provision) patching up and making a pigs ear out of something that having sets would sort out. I pity the teachers who have to teach to a wide ability class. They're being asked the impossible.

Thank god we've still got grammer schools in my area (for now)!

I agree- I just think its one heck of a lot easier to support children who fall under the G&T banner (especially as it is so broad). And I really object to the idea on these threads that "children with SN are given help" (just like that!) when in many cases they're not even receiving an education.

Setting would sort it - except for the very small % who are true geniuses (and there are not many of those - and yes if they really are that bright then probably special arrangement need to be made, but that still shouldn't be that difficult).

I don't like the 'Gifted and Talented' labelling - and I think lots of the children labelled as G&T aren't 'really' gifted iyswim! I think there is a difference between 'gifted' and clever. For example in music, lots of children may be quite good at music, but the top 10% in any school almost certainly won't be 'gifted musicians'. A truly gifted musician probably only comes along once every 5 years or so.

It was summed up for me by a teenager I know who said to me she had to do lots of drawing practice at home, because her art teacher was considering putting her on the G&T register, and this would help her 'make it' on to it.

HOWEVER, I do think extra support in areas where children can be stretched and helped is fantastic, so I think helping children achieve is good, it's just the 'labelling' I hate.

agree tortoishell and that one in every 5 years talent may need some extra support, but the others really shouldn't need to be singled out to have their needs met.

I believe that Grammar Schools are part of the answer, but they've unfortunately become non-PC. Grrrrrrrrrr.

Gess/Kerrymum ... you're both right. You're just arguing from opposite ends of the stick.

I'm not sure I understand what you mean by setting isn't allowed?

Both my older dds (at different comprehensive schools) are set for most subjects.

At ks2 our junior school set for maths and english if appropriate in yr6.

At ks1 we set for maths half way through yr1 and all of yr2. Other subjects as and when.

Infants and juniors have 2 classes per year so one teacher has the top 30 and the other the bottom 30 for these subjects.

i don't think kids need to be "taught" learning skills or anything either

they HAVE those skills

god, compared to, say, learning to walk and talk, getting a gcse in Conceptual Tap Dance or whatever should be a piece of piss, really

Firstly, every school (state at least) should have a person who is the G & T co-ordinator and it's their job to have a list of all children who are considered as such.

They are there for both teachers and children to help them acheive to their full potential. This is no different to children of lesser abilities being given extra help by SN teachers. The head where my DD is now said that G & T children also have SN and should therefore be helped, instead of twiddling their thumbs once they've finished work etc.

When I was at primary school, once the children who worked more quickly had finished their work, they had to wait for everybody else to catch up and we were often found tidying the music cupboard whilst this happened or spent afternoon upon afternoon removing staples from displays etc. We should have been given extra work instead to help us move on. They could never do that now.

It's not supposed to be a boasting thing - just another branch of special needs.

I remember once reading an article about kids who go to Uni really young. You know the type and the author pondered why you rarely if ever hear of one of these kids going to Uni early to study Psychology or Philosophy. Made me think that observation.

Anyway my DS is very bright academically ( I always like to make that distinction) but the other day I asked him which was more important to be clever or kind. 'Kind' he said to which I replied 'that's how clever you are you know which is most important'.

dros- agree there's a big difference between clever academically and being bright.

I worked on a couple of summer gifted and talented summer schools and summer schools for children who needed help with preporation for secondary school. The only difference I saw was confidence. One offered more support to children in different subjects than the other, both where challenging for the kids and the kids in both settings learned through fun. As adults do.....some of us are better in areas than others......I not great at maths, does'nt mean I am an low achieving because I didn't get on a gifted and talented course. The courses are budgeted financially (sadly) for only a certain amount of children....which sucks, because all children deserve the chance to be stretched further, if they want too.

or after re-reading my thread litracy.