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

[Twiglett]

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?

Oh, and the there's your awe and wonder moments (aw) oh yes, my head wanted us to plan an activity where the children went 'wow!' We even ahd to write on our plans in a special colour to show where this was...

Oh FFS, THAT'S exactly why people hate the whole G&T thing. The idea that a bright kid has the same needs as one who is blind or have severe learning difficulties or autism is just RUBBISH. Of course some needs are more pressing and serious than others. It's absolutely obvious.
Would you choose for your child to be less intelligent? Do you honestly think being clever is a handicap in the same was as a lifelong learning or developmental disability?

Our education system isn't set up to meet the needs of every child so some children will, inevitably, miss out.
Teachers/schools cannot be all things to all children.

It isn't a choice between teaching to the lowest common denominator and labelling children with that particular term.
I'm all for academic children having their needs met (which is why I am in favour of grammar schools, but that's another thread, and anyway it's not the only option) but labelling a group of children with that term is not necessary.

My 9 year old son is at the same stage of reading, writing, comprehension etc as I was at, at the same age.

I was of average ability in my state junior in 1975.

He is 'G&T.'

I am so angered by your attitude that I can't type. There are people out there with children who will struggle to ever learn to read, who may never live independently, don't you dare say that being clever is just the same as that.
My ds is very bright, as it happens, but fucking hell, having an ASD is in a different league of need.

shrinking violet - those activities sound pretty good. but why are they only available to the top say 5% what if you are in say the 6th percentile? that's what makes it quite daft in my view - the arbitrary cut-off.

You need a reality check. Though I hope you never get one. I don't think you'd cope at all.
And don't try to insinuate I said anything derogatory about your son at all, because that's a lie.

Jesus, you just have no idea, do you?

The problem with stretching bright children is school- however bright they are they need to take the same exams as the less bright- so they will be taught to the exam. That's the job of mainstream schools - to get children through exams- so they teach exam syllabuses, which do not give room for degree level maths.

Stretching bright children out of school is easy-incredibly easy- take them to a museum, set them a project to do, let them lose in the library.on a computer. Let them develop their owen interests. The 2 'world experts' I know (one on owls, one on beetles) were both entirely self taught. One went to the 'bog standard' comp- but that didn;t stop him publishing in the scientific literature in his spare time- his first paper was published when he was 15. His spare time was spent in the countryside, developing his skills.

It bears absolutely no comparison to trying to teach a severely autistic child with zero imitation skills to sign a single word. I do know someone who aged 9 has achieved his first sign- after 3 years of a team of people working on it.

look can we just all agree that the phrase 'take a pill / chillpill' is rather offensive and stop using it

Yeah, all needs are euqal and the needs of someone with a sprained ankle are the same as someone who has no legs.

fair point KM

No it isn't apples and oranges. Some needs are clearly more serious and pressing than others. That is obvious. I'd say the fact that no parent of a bright child would wish them to be less clever is a pretty clear sign that it isn't really comparable with a disability.
My son is the best reader in his class, can add negative numbers etc This is not a problem. It's a bloody joy. His Aspergers is a problem.

I don't see anyone saying one set of needs are more important. My point is that one set of needs are far easier to meet (god I've got kids at both ends of the ability spectrum).

TBH I think the most important thing in life is being able to live an independent life of your own choosing. Gifted children can achieve that pretty easily. The same is not true for the SLD/PMLD population (most of whom will never live an independent life od their own choosing, they will always rely on the decisions of others) so I guess I do think that teaching them basic communication skills IS more important that putting money into stretching he brightest when the truly bright and talented will stretch themselves.

My IQ is over 150 (yes, really), so I am bright enough not to post on this thread.

Whoops.

It is simply not possible to compare a child who is physically or mentally impaired to a child who is intelligent. There really is no comparison.