Shitty shite: Gifted & Talented

[MamaG]

shite

Yes but currently SN provision is shocking. This is where the money should be spent surely (because it does generally take more man power to deal with SN than it does g&t.) Yes I agree bright kids should be stretched- ds2 is being stretched without any extra staffing needed at all.

A big problem for bright children at secondary level is that the current exam system may not stretch them, but they still need to pass the exam, which means they still need to study the syllabus. Should exams be made harder? Or should bright children have access to a greater number of subjects?

I agree with Gess.

I do also think a lot of people do assert that their kids are gifted in order to show off about how clever they are. They certainly make me worried that my daughters are thick.

At my children's previate schools you usually do about 9 or 10 GCSEs. A few very clever ones do more. I don't tink the numbers matter. In the 1980s my brother at his private school did 1st year university science or maths because the school thought the A level syllabus not challenging enough for the boys. They did the A level too.

On special needs the telegraph has an article today about residential provision. Apparently it costs about £50k a year to have a child fostered (where they need that), residential places can be £80k a year plus as someone said below and obviously lots of disagreement over whether children should always be with their families or not and whether it's good to put together children with problems in groups or have them within other schools.

This is the article www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/05/27/nedu427.xml

at 14, my ds has already done a lot of gcse papers. he certainly does not want to join a class of 17 yr olds. they are completely different to a 14yr old, however gifted. he is in a very academic school too.

the more i think about it, the more i think this g&t stuff is useless. as long as there are good resources, eg, the internet, a library and others with similar interests, then a highly intelligent child can follow their interests themselves.

The age thing is true. I was smallest in the class all through as a year young although I was quite mature so it wasn't a massive problem. YOu want to be with your year group. The private schools do let some children do their GCSEs or some of them a year young and may be some state schools do. The Government then doesn't count them in your league table scores so it takes a brave school to let the brightests' results not be included. I think the main thing is to ensure children aren't bored at school. There's plenty to do out of school on line and in the library but it's being bored in lessons which is so wasteful for clever children. I know the private schools my children are at supposedly are 1 - 2 year ahead of state primaries in every subject and level going through from age 5. Why should you have to buy that advantage?

Ok Kerrymum, have been thinking about your post.

Things I would look for in a child who was gifted at music - the main thing is that it seems to be 'part' of them - this sounds quite 'la-di-dah' but what I mean is that they can't help but make music. They will take every opportunity to play, listen, sing, make music with others. You can't imagine the child without music. They don't struggle over learning a piece, and they will enjoy the challenge of learning a hard piece. They will do their lesson pieces, but will play for fun for hours besides their regular practice.

Playing music will seem easy - in watching them the listener will think 'it's not so hard really', however hard the piece, because it is done with a sense of ease. The music they play 'speaks' to the listener in some way - it is not just notes, but something deeper that touches the listener inside.

Does that make any sense? I'll keep thinking - it's one of those things that is hideously difficult to define, but it made me think a bit more of what I think 'gifted' is in a wider sense. I think the difference between a 'clever' child and a 'gifted' child is the 'need' to learn. A clever child can learn everything they're given and understand, a 'gifted' one has a physical NEED to learn more about the world and things.

Kerrymum - there is a national association for gifted children. They have a website which you may find useful for your child.

Dunno about G&T, ds is only in nursery atm, but I do object strongly to the 'bright children will do OK even with crap teachers/in a crap school' line. Rubbish. Having been a bright child and experienced both good local schools that catered for all abilities and sink schools with exhausted/cynical teachers, I can't begin to tell you the relief of escaping from the sink schools to a selective academic school. There is no way I would have survived and done well at the crap schools.

"Children who are G&T do not remotely need that level of support."

but what about G&T (that so makes me think of drinking ...) kids who also have SN? Both my boys are scarily bright, one has Tourette's, the other has Asperger's (obviously dh's and my genes made a bit of an odd mixture ) - when ds1 was being diagnosed his IQ scores put him in the top 0.2% of the population, we didn't want to know what ds2's were as it has been a bit of a millstone for ds1. School is an incredibly difficult place for him to be and although he has no physical problems he needs an awful lot of support for him to be anywhere near fulfilling his potential - and the LEA recognises this as his 'giftedness' is part of his statement

Good point, mimsum.

I think that's the problem the Government caused. The slightly cleverer child is not gifted at all. They 're just clever. Very very occasionally you get some kind of genius child who is 5 years ahead of everyone or whatever and on a different type of plane and they need very special help but they are few and far between.

My goodness I find myself agreeing 100% with a xenia post

Have been reading and also find myself agreeing with motherinferior on these threads.

They're not any less important but apart from the miniscule tiny number of geniuses they're needs are a lot easier to meet.

I got to Oxford without any recognition of ever being bright. I certainly didn't think I was and laughed when it was suggested that I apply. I didn't have extra stretching lessons at all. I only applied on an off chance. Lots of friends there were the same. We got there without any special nurturing. My parents got me a library ticket when I was young and I read a lot (because I enjoyed it) I can't think of anything else that was done. In fact my mother used to tell me stop taking exams so seriously and "you can only do your best and the result doesn't matter".

DS2 and DS3 will be easily able to reach their academic potential if they so choose. (That will be their decision).

Kerrymum, something else I meant to add about your ds - if you think he is talented at music, I would really strongly suggest you get him conventional piano lessons - this will serve him better in the long run imo, you can play the keyboard with a piano technique, but not the other way round!

agree with Gess and Fillyjonk.

What was Newton?s education like? Or Darwin?s? Or Shakespeare?s? Did they get special extending exercises? I have no idea but I always wonder about that when this issue comes up.

Maybe you're right. But what's his name Wolsey was a butcher's son wasn't he? Think he was pretty bright.

I didn't say he should kerrymum, but equally I don't think it would be that difficult to extend him. It shouldn't need extra staffing, or specialist training in the way that ensuring a child with SN received a basic education does. If the school is anti bright children (and I agree that some are) then its time to move schools.

DS2 often asks me questions I can't answer; I tell him to look it up and tell me the answer.

As for "why can't he study physics" - he can- buy him some books- self study is a wonderful skill.

As for "whcy can't he study physics at school when he wants to". Because schools have the national curriculum to follow, and exams to pass and that means studying a set syllabus which will include some physics but needs to cover other areas as well. Some parents really hate that idea so they home educate, which I have some sympathy with, although I think for many children there are disadvantages to HE as well as advatages.

Incidentally I've taught some very bright young people in my time, and the number who get to 18 unable to use a book as a reference is shocking. I really mean it when I say getting your child a library ticket and teaching them how to use an index would be one of the best things you can teach them. And anyone can teach that.