School for the gifted

[NameChangedNoImagination]

If there was a school for the gifted, would you send your child? I would have loved one when I was a child. Where learning is accelerated to your own pace and where you have time and encouragement to study special interests.

Not read the whole thread but agree wholeheartedly with alexa

Leapfrog funnily enough I did decide against applying to Oxbridge to do medicine. Their degrees back then had little clinical content until the third year. After 7 years locked away at boarding school, I knew people skills would be my Achilles heel and I felt that a more clinically-slanted course elsewhere would make me a better doctor. I still think that was a good decision.

More broadly I see your point but I do think it's reductio ad absurdam. School children are still developing and growing social skills, absorbing values etc as a really important aspect of growing up. By 18 these skills should have been acquired and the focus is more on a specific academic subject. Education should be much broader at 9, or 11, or 13, than it is at 18. A corollary is perhaps boarding - I believe most children are best off at home with their parents at 9, 11 or 13, but I'm OK with them moving out for university . Others make different choices and think their 9 year olds are best off in group dorms with "amazing" pastoral care.

Let me play devil's advocate the other way and ask how you'd feel about a child being identified as super-gifted at age 2 - or at 5 months as in a PP's example on this thread - and never being allowed to mix with non-gifted children. Would that make them better able to reach their full potential? For me it would be limiting them more than it could ever add, because the world is full of people and engaging with people is a key life skill.

Different talents have different age-specificities - ie some sports/instruments require earlier development by specialists than others.

Eg some world class rowers May only have started the sport at uni whereas this is unlikely for gymnasts. Few world class violinists would have started lessons after 8 but the same may not be true for tuba, bassoon. The amount of early specialist tuition required probably plays a part in requirements for specialist schools - football, ballet, music.

I’m not sure the same is true for academic ability. Many people don’t require early development to become researchers in a field. Encouragement to do extra reading/problems (could be done quite unobtrusively after classwork is done) might help development as well as online resources outside school. Homeschool might be possible. I think too much emphasis is put on kids reaching a nebulous ‘potential’.

Might be worth reading up on Gordon Brown and I believe Val McDermids experience in a fast track gifted scheme. I vaguely remember they both have said how it was more destructive than useful but could be wrong.

And anyway, I firmly believe that in times of economic constraint any spare cash should go to the other end of the bell curve. super clever children may have their difficulties- but they pale into insignificance impacted to the difficulties of children who struggle with the basics

@bertrandrussell Not perfectly, no, but if I were founding a school I would make outreach and diversity a key part of the charter. I think it’s achievable with good financial support/ bursaries.

@Bally I think where we fundamentally disagree is that you feel as though a school like the one OP suggests would be detrimental to social development, whereas I feel as though it would be overwhelmingly positive in many cases. And of course no one is advocating locking their child in an ivory tower. I think a properly diverse school in terms of background would offer just as many opportunities for social enrichment as a regular school. More even as the students could come from anywhere, rather than the few streets surrounding the school as is the case in many London state schools.

And while I agree that an 18 year old is a different case from a younger child, I feel as though there are so many children who have had their social development stunted at an early age due to a negative school experience (being ostracised for being a “geek” rather than being allowed to socialise on their own terms, however unconventional those might be), that this is a potentially healthier alternative.

Those putting the acquisition of social skills on a pedestal also need to be a bit careful in my opinion about glorifying a one size fits all (and slightly ableist) concept of what healthy social skills are. I’d be happy if my child had one genuine friend (or none if that is what makes him happy). I’m lucky enough to be socially adept enough to make mixing with people fun for me, but I’m not going to impose that expectation on my child if it’s not who he is. That was a bit of a tangent, but I think it also does play into what we are talking about here...

Bert

There should be enough for both, so I strongly agree with you.
I've experienced this with one of our dc, believe it or not it is the gifted one who has struggled academically and still isn't out of the woods.
I'm not equating it though because at least she has something in which to excel.

“Not perfectly, no, but if I were founding a school I would make outreach and diversity a key part of the charter. I think it’s achievable with good financial support/ bursaries.“

It didn’t /doesn’t work for grammar schools. I see no way you can make it work for your schools for the exceptionally clever......

leapfrog

You are completely right, how more diverse can you get than the children of multi millionaires, to sink estate, with everything in between.
Mne has started talking posher I must admit, but she's still the down to earth girl she's always been. I don't think her brothers would let her get above her station

Sorry one more thing - there’s a lot of talk about fast tracking and hot housing. I think that I’m imagining the opposite. A chance to let children develop at their own natural pace. Which happens to be different from the general population’s.

Re: economic constraints, I was imagining that the school would be an independently funded one (ideally with a bursary system). I do think it would work either as a business or as a charity. And if the school helped kids who would otherwise burn out or drop out, and who have the potential to be out of the box thinkers who could help work our way out of the mess that we have managed to get ourselves into globally, that’s worth investing in. Of course everyone is welcome to have their own opinions. I just wish I’d had the option as a child!

@romanyqueen1 got to love a sibling for keeping you grounded!

There's a significant amount of outreach work from dd school, it's part of her time table, they have absolutely no say in the matter and they all really enjoy it and they are widely welcomed.
The saddest thing is I hear that many schools don't take up the offer, not because they don't want it but they have nobody to coordinate it, no designated music dept.
The people who would most definitely benefit can't access it, and that is so so saddening.

Leapfrog - I think it would be v hard to avoid the hot housed kids applying and getting in. Most tests can be prepared for. The idea it is for intellectually able immediately makes it a target for pushy parents.

Although you have to be careful with the internet and kids, it does open up a lot of niche interests to more people

It will be just another opportunity for privileged kids to get more privilege.

My dd goes to similar kind of school to Romanys dd, funded in the same way but in a different genre.

They really do select on potential. One girl who had never had a lesson in her life was discovered in a primary school 6 week outreach programme.

I also know an extremely academically gifted child. Luckily fir her, her parents were able to send her to a private school though they rejected the more pushy ones. She really was a fish out of water. Even at the private school she is just different.

There are no grammar schools or super selective schools in my area. If a child is bright they do well, but are overlooked in favour of getting the weaker ones through their GCSEs. Schools here don’t even have 6th forms.

So I can really see the advantage for genuine outliers.

I think everyone here has different ideas about what this means.

There are a number of gifted schools in the US and none of the ones I am aware of require anyone to board and they really aren't that different from the most academic private schools or super selective grammar schools in the UK. Also the work won't feel high pressured as the pace is appropriate for the children's ability.

A city the size of London would have circa 2,600 babies born every year that would qualify as gifted (top 2 percent /130+ IQ). You could have several schools all over the city for gifted pupils without the need for boarding.

Also, being in an appropriately academic school doesn't mean you won't learn how to interact with non-gifted people if you are part of your community: extracurriculars, church, after school job, family, volunteering etc.

Without the appropriate academic challenge though some gifted children (partly dependant on personality) will become apathetic about school and significantly underachieve due to the dullness of the experience.

Bert

Over 90% of children receive funding at dd school, you pay on a sliding scale. Money won't get you accepted if it's not a good mix for school and child.
I believe it's a fantastic model and if it could be simulated for other subjects I think it should.
I always relate back to my dd friend who is extremely gifted in Maths, it will get her nowhere though and never be utilised due to lack of opportunity and parental input. If it was part of the culture to be supported from an early age this needn't be the case.
These schools really do provide social mobility too, yet they don't claim to.

Bert

Over 90% of children receive funding at dd school, you pay on a sliding scale. Money won't get you accepted if it's not a good mix for school and child.
I believe it's a fantastic model and if it could be simulated for other subjects I think it should.
I always relate back to my dd friend who is extremely gifted in Maths, it will get her nowhere though and never be utilised due to lack of opportunity and parental input. If it was part of the culture to be supported from an early age this needn't be the case.
These schools really do provide social mobility too, yet they don't claim to.

State school for the gifted in Florida

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pine_View_School

A city the size of London would have circa 2,600 babies born every year that would qualify as gifted (top 2 percent /130+ IQ). You could have several schools all over the city for gifted pupils without the need for boarding.

I know that some definitions of giftedness talk about the top 2%, but that's actually a very low threshold - you'd be talking about 3-4 kids per year group in an average secondary school. While those kids are obviously very bright, I really don't see why they would need specialist provision. In any case, special schools for the top 2% just sound like another version of grammar schools, and I think there is substantial evidence that they don't really work as they end up full of heavily tutored middle-class kids rather than the brightest.

I had assumed that those arguing for special provision were thinking more about profoundly gifted children, not just the top 2%, most of whom will be well within the range of normal. There would only ever be a few of those kids at any one time, so I really can't see how you could avoid boarding.

I have been thinking about this thread and while I am very firmly of the view that NT children who also happen to be gifted are best catered for in mainstream schools, I suppose that there might be a need for some sort of special provision for those who are twice exceptional. I'm thinking particularly of those gifted children who really struggle to relate to their peers, as I suspect that many of them are on the autistic spectrum, whether or not they have been diagnosed as such. As far as I'm aware, most of the existing special school provision doesn't cater well for kids who are high academic achievers, so perhaps that needs some thought.

@AlexaShutUp A great template for the kind of school you’re talking about is Bridges in California. www.bridges.edu/#
There’s also a 2e specific school in New York (can’t remember the name)

Thanks leapfrog, I'll have a look. I'm still of the view that most gifted children are better off in mainstream schools, whether they are NT or not. However, I'm willing to accept that a small minority of non-NT kids might do better in a different environment. However, I think it's the additional difficulties which require the special provision, rather than the giftedness per se - just a different type of special provision from the sort that is generally out there.

My close friend's dd is highly gifted and also has aspergers. She has been in mainstream school (state primary, state comp) all through and is about to do her GCSEs. There have been some significant struggles along the way but she has been exceptionally well supported by her school and she has flourished. I went to see her in her school play last year, and it was an absolute joy to see her interacting with her peers afterwards. She is clearly very different from them, but they seemed to understand and accept her differences and my friend said that the other kids have been immensely kind and supportive. If she had been sent to a specialist school, not only would she have missed out on developing skills to function effectively in normal society but her peers would also have missed out on the opportunity to learn to accept and respect someone very different from themselves. Surely we need that kind of interaction and exposure in order to become a more tolerant society.

Of course, I realise that many kids don't get the kind of support from school that helped my friend's dd. Many schools lack resource, expertise, sometimes even mortivation. In an ideal world, though, I think that, rather than investing in the creation of special schools for gifted children - twice exceptional or otherwise - I'd rather see better support, training and accountability in all schools for all children with additional needs.

*motivation

Does the top 2% count as gifted? Is that top 2% nationally or by LEA or what? Top 2% across the board? What about spiky profiles? When do you choose? How do you choose? What about kids who peak early or late? How do you make sure these schools are not just packed with the middle classes, like grammar schools? Why is the right hand end of the bell curve more deserving than the left hand side?

Bertrand there is existing provision for the left hand side, this is not either/or.