Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Gifted and talented

Talk to other parents about parenting a gifted child on this forum.

Original poster

OK< I'll admit the G&T term just riles me

171 replies

Twiglett · 01/08/2007 17:16

and I accept that there are children who are immensely talented or gifted

and I accept that my children are very bright but probably not geniuses (genii?)

and I also accept that parents of children who show exceptional ability need just as much help and advice as children who have SEN .. in fact I also accept that superlatively bright children do have SEN

so why does the G&T term get to me?

hmm?

OP posts:
Sheherazadethegoat · 01/08/2007 17:18

i think cos it implies that other children (i.e. ours) are neither.

also it is v. hard to shake the images of the crazed curly haired kid who used to appear on wogan or that girl who went to cambridge when she was about 8 and her freakily attentive father.

bossykate · 01/08/2007 17:19

because it is a useless label? because what goes with it in schools is poorly executed and of little value to the children? because a top 5% banding is a stupid arbitrary measure? because all children should be stretched to their maximum potential at school?

clumsymum · 01/08/2007 17:21

I think the term is just prissy.

Personally I think you get clever kids, I think you get talented kids. Some kids who are generally clever don't have a particular talent.

Some kids with a great talent aren't especially bright at other things.

You can't group kids in this way (just like special needs, some have physical needs, some more mental help).

Original poster
Twiglett · 01/08/2007 17:22

that's probably it .. top 5% of children does not mean gifted or talented

Einstein, Beethoven, Maya Angelou = gifted / talented

bright kids used to be o'level / a'level top stream

OP posts:
Kathyis6incheshigh · 01/08/2007 17:22

I am with you here, Twiglett.

My first problem is that I think that if you label a certain proportion of the class as 'gifted and talented' you cannot avoid there being some hint of an implication that the other children are neither gifted nor talented, and I would like to believe that talents and gifts are something that pretty much everyone has.

Secondly, I have never met a single adult who was given that label as a child who thinks it was a good thing overall. There was a documentary about gifted children a few years back (one of the children was Kirsty MacColl) and they all said that being labelled was the worst thing that ever happened to them.

Thirdly, I think the current usage of the term in education is a con to distract attention from the fact that academically bright children were not being properly catered for. Calling it 'g&t' makes it sound like they are now catering for children who have never been catered for before, rather than providing what they should have been providing all along.

Original poster
Twiglett · 01/08/2007 17:22
OP posts:
berolina · 01/08/2007 17:24

I think gifts and talents are so diverse it seems a bit arbitrary and possibly not very productive to have a G&T 'label' - particularly because it has come to be used as meaning 'very academic'. An academically gifted child is a quite different kettle of fish to a musical or very sporty one - or, FWIW, a particularly empathetic one (also a gift IMO).

I do also think some people can (sometimes unfairly) feel parents discussing their 'G&T' children are boasting.

southeastastra · 01/08/2007 17:25

it's poncey, in my sons secondary it's called accelerated learning

berolina · 01/08/2007 17:26

I suspect, if I were a child now, I would be 'G&T'.

legalalien · 01/08/2007 17:27

I agree with everyone, except that I do think that there's something strange about someone using the term "gifted and talented" to describe their child, other than in the context of "s/he's been identified as G&T by the school". Otherwise, isn't it it a bit artificial? Wouldn't you be more likely to say that your child was very bright / good at reading / great at painting?

gess · 01/08/2007 17:28

I don't agree that children with exceptional ability need as much help and advice as children with complex special needs. I think anyone who truly believes that needs to take a trip to an SLD/PMLD school. Truly gifted children stretch themselves (e.g. by going to the library) they don't need teaching. The term is over applied.

Whizzz · 01/08/2007 17:28

At the secondary school were I work, there are lists of gifted & lists of talented pupils but as far as I can see - not much else is done for them...some get to go on trips . IMO it makes other non-G / T pupils feel inferior but then thats just my opinion

Kathyis6incheshigh · 01/08/2007 17:30

I agree Legalalien - I think very often (when it isn't pride) it's anxiety - sort of 'help, it turns out my child is a special sort of child and I don't know what that special sort of child needs because they've been given a special label so it must be different from a normal child.'

That's another reason why I think it's unhelpful.

Original poster
Twiglett · 01/08/2007 17:31

agrees with gess .. clumsily backtracks from OP as didn't mean to imply it was the same thing

(ok now I'm doing the imply / infer thing and can't work out which one is right in this instance, I reallly am too feckin' tired today)

OP posts:
Carmenere · 01/08/2007 17:31

Talented I don't mind but Gifted annoys me. accelerated learning sounds much more inclusive.

FluffyMummy123 · 01/08/2007 17:32

Message withdrawn

muppetgirl · 01/08/2007 17:35

I hate it too. I'm an ex teacher. We have sen and now g&t. The next thing will be n&a I'm sure (normal and average)
I was a gifted musician ast school which wasn't picked up on until I was 11 when I started playing the 'cello. I only did grades 1,5 & 8 (1+8 high distinctions) learned pieces of mucis from Cd's etc...the school didn't provide any extra help with this, my music teachers put me froward for scholarships as this was really their remit.

Some people have hidden talent that they don't even know they have!

My fil was not wonderful at school yet he went to uni as a mature student and did a degree, masters and phd yet his intelligence, or 'gifts' didn't appear until he was much older.

muppetgirl · 01/08/2007 17:39

But then when I was teaching we were asked to list the G&T children in our class and their names were filled in on a form.
Great, nothing was done unless it was stretching those who were G&T at 'academic' subjsetc, such as Literacy, Numeracy and Science. I taught in primary.

Does G&T actually mean anything?
DO schools actually do anything about G&T children?

gess · 01/08/2007 17:43

The only time I've come across it being any use was in areas of high social deprivation. G+T children there were ones who were capable of getting 5 GCSE's = money was spent to get them together for extra classes- ecnourage friendships across schools etc and try to get them to complete their education (and get those 5 GCSE's). In other cases agree with cod.

Troutpout · 01/08/2007 17:45

i'm with the fish woman on this one

ShrinkingViolet · 01/08/2007 17:45

it can be very useful for gifted children to meet up with other gifted children and they can suffer by knowing that they're different to the rest fo their class/year. For a lot of children NAGTY summer schools and outreach courses have been a lifesaver (in some cases literally) where their school has not been supportive of their particular needs.
DD1 spent all her primary years wondering why no=one else seemed to think the way she did (as well as accepting it was normal to have to sit and wait for at least half a maths lesson for the rest of her (top) set to catch up). She's currently doing a History Summer School being taught by university lecturers for two weeks, mixing with her academic peer group, having group discussions about class and womens' status throughout history, tomorrow they'll be talkign about the history of madness.
Gifted children need stretching sideways, and the majority of schools don't have the time or resources to do that.
That's why a gifted label can be good. However, I don't agree with identifying the top 10% in each school as G&T.

KerryMumbledore · 01/08/2007 17:48

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

ShrinkingViolet · 01/08/2007 17:48

muppetgirl - DD1s state comp runs enrichment days for it's G&T students, as well as things like the Maths Challenges, Problem Solving competitions. Plus there a re after-school clubs - DD1 has been doing an English one discussing "journeys" in literature, then putting on a presentation of satirical humour (they read Gulliver's Travels as one of the texts) for parents and staff. Her school is fairly unusual in it's provision though.

muppetgirl · 01/08/2007 17:52

Shrinkingviolet - My first headmistress would definately agree with you. She was all for enrichment not advancement
I taught yr4 at the time and the answer was not to give them yr5 work -what would they do in yr5??
But this does make planning lesson tricky as we had to have the 3 differentiated groups top-middle-bottom. Then you had your sen (who weren't the bottom) and then the g&T's. That's 5 differentiated groups per lesson. Quite difficult to do.

aloha · 01/08/2007 17:55

Actually, Kerrysmum, I do not agree that being clever is a special need in the same way as say, having autism or learning difficulties. Children with special needs really struggle in a way that clever kids just don't. My ds is clever but he also has Aspergers. The cleverness would not be a problem (though yes, he does get bored) if he didn't have Aspergers.