Gifted & talented should be stopped!

[lijaco]

I think this should be stopped it isn't accurate, it isn't fair and parents become self obsessed with it. Learning then becomes pressure for kids from parents to be top. If you didn't you wouldn't have this section. STOP IT!

[Remotew]

Must admit, we'd never heard of it in primary. When did it all start anyway. They have only done it in primary for the past three years or so.

[avenanap]

It was introduced in 2004, I remember because ds was in reception and the teachers were going on about it. The problem is that the top 10% of G&T children in one school may not be in the top 10% if they move somewhere else. It's a tick box excercise.

[lijaco]

My son was on G & T register, and I don't think that I pressured him but you do expect results if I am honest. Yes I have talented students and students that try etc. I am not annoyed about it.

[Remotew]

I suppose you do expect results. I was chuffed at first but now it doesn't mean much. She should do well in GSCE but will leave it up to her. She has set her sights high and I do wonder if her achievements are a result of being on this register or if she would have come on anyway. I think it gave her confidence and belief in her abilities.

Boys sorry its turned boring.

[BoysAreLikeDogs]

[Remotew]

Lol.

[cornsilk]

you are shameless boys

[cornsilk]

snogs lijaco as revenge

[fembear]

I find it depressing that the people on MN who disparage G&T the most tend to be teachers. Some seem to think that only one child in a generation should be on the list.
Are you surprised that, if parents think that their child is not being supported, they get anxious and obsessed? Posters on here never mention 'being top', they just talk about fulfilling potential and keeping their information-hungry child happy.

[Remotew]

fembear, I think that the word gifted confuses people with the word genius.

[cory]

lijaco on Fri 03-Oct-08 21:41:48
"I have 4 clever lads and 1 girl very proud. My youngest is 17months and next is 4 years old. I teach ,at secondary school . I am in my thirties,so if you are saying that I am out of touch ? I don't think so! (cory)"

Where did I say you were out of touch? I merely asked for clarification as to what your post was about, whether the thing you want stopped is the application of the Gifted & Talented label to the top 10% in schools, or this Mumsnet section named Gifted & Talented or the perception of some (unspecified) parents in RL who believe their children are unusually gifted. They are three overlapping but partly distinct things; you did not make it clear in your OP which you were referring to.

I was not trying to be sarcastic: until I knew which of the three you want abolished, I had no means of knowing whether I agree or disagree with you. (in fact, I probably agree)

From later posts, I would imagine what you are posting about is the fact that labelling children G&T encourages the parents to put undue pressure on them. This may well be so in some schools; I have little experience of it myself. I suspect this is more a question of social/class aspirations than of giftedness itself. Where parents do this, clearly it is wrong, but it may have little to do with the school label; chances are that kind of parent would always be nagging their child to shine in some area or other.

But this MN section also deals with other aspects. In particular, it offers support to those parents who find themselves in a difficult situation because their extremely gifted child is a square peg in a round hole. I am not myself in this position, but it is clear that it exists and that these parents have not created their children's difficulties.

[lijaco]

the top 10% of achievers are not square pegs in round holes. They are the ones that are able to achieve through formal methods of teaching. I just believe that identification should not unduly disadvantage any group of learners. And whatever the actual level your child is at you need to remember the actual age of the child. The assessment process isn't accurate and every child is an individual. They all can have varying difficulties at school. This section is so ignorant.

[singersgirl]

Can a section be ignorant?

[lijaco]

Not really! seems that I have caused a stir. Everyone entitled to their opinion, can't believe how this thread has gone. I wasn't angry when I posted and I am not now. Just annoying many under achievers have gifted abilities and are never included because they are disadvantaged. I am done here! All children develop at different rates and most level out.

[singersgirl]

Well, clearly people don't level out. People are vastly different from one another in all sorts of ways. Precocity does not necessarily last - that's true. And slow starters can race ahead academically - that's true. But people have vastly different academic and educational outcomes. Some people are better at schoolwork than others, just like some are better at sports and some are more musical. Some people are very, very good at one thing and some people are good at lots of things.

I think when people talk about levelling out, they mean that by a certain stage in their education (Grade 3 or Year 4 is often mentioned) that children will have found roughly their level and early precocity can be discounted.

[Elkat]

OP- I can't believe, that as a teacher you don't see the need for G&T.

I recognise that there is a whole world of difference between truly gifted and the schools' definitions, but I think both are worthy of a thread.

True G&T children deserve a thread because they are very different from their peers and I'm sure that this would bring up a whole range of issues, as other posters have expressed.

But G&T children as in the top 10% deserve a thread too, because there are different but still problems in dealing with them. I know that as a teacher, there can be a tendency in schools to deal with the G&T kids by giving them 'more' work. But more work of the same level is not differentiating properly. When I studied my MA in Education, we looked at this issue and noted that many teachers do simply seem to assume that it is enough to simply give the child more work. Yet this is not good enough. I know that it is something that I do struggle with at times. I only teach 'A' levels now, but struggle to find appropriate undergraduate level work for my brightest, to really stretch them - particularly the Oxbridge candidates, who have often read ahead, know the topic before you even introduce it and so on... So yes, it is a real challenge finding them appropriate work.

Also, as a mother, I find this to be an issue too. My daughter is bright. She is not 'gifted' in the traditional sense, she is only 'bright' but that still poses challenges, For example, she has learnt some things not typical of her age. Helping her to do this, can be a real challenge. For example, at 3 she learnt to tell the time (1/4 to and 1/4 past). I really struggled to find an age appropriate book to help her learn this. You can't ask friends in real life, because it looks as though you are bragging. Equally, you can't post on the ordinary education section, because that too looks like you are bragging... so what do you do? Spend loads of money until you eventually find something that works, or find a 'safe' place (like this section) where you can ask knowing that you will get genuine help and support, without being accused or having others sneering at you? (Incidentally, in the end, someone suggested a Maisy book, which we bought and did the trick!) Our current issue is to find books that are appropriate for her reading ability, but ones that are also appropriate for her age and level of maturity.

Being G&T in the sense of just being bright is not the same as being gifted in the traditional sense, but it does have its own difficulties. I know that primarily as a teacher. Given that when parents posts about G&T on the education section on here, they seem to get a lot of flak about boasting etc etc... I think a G&T section that other people can easily ignore is the most sensible solution. It provides help and support for those who need it, whilst not being in the faces of those who don't want to see it.

[cory]

lijaco on Sat 04-Oct-08 19:37:02
"the top 10% of achievers are not square pegs in round holes. They are the ones that are able to achieve through formal methods of teaching. I just believe that identification should not unduly disadvantage any group of learners. And whatever the actual level your child is at you need to remember the actual age of the child. The assessment process isn't accurate and every child is an individual. They all can have varying difficulties at school. This section is so ignorant."

I think we are talking at cross purposes. The square-peg-in-round-hole children I referred to are not the same group as those 10% identified by every school.

I meant those children who are genuinely gifted in a very unusual way (and who may or may not also have been included in the school programme). I think we do have a number of parents who post in this section, not because their children are in the top 10%, but because they have genuine reasons to believe that there is something very different about their children.

This does not apply to all of the 10% who get identified in schools- and most of their parents know that perfectly well. Me, for instance. My dd has been identified as G&T- I know that means nothing and it doesn't bother me in the slightest. Just means, "fairly bright as that particular school goes".

I also happen to have totally unrelated grounds to think that she has a genuine and unusual talent for language. Again, doesn't worry me, just a case of keeping the bookshelves well stocked and making sure she doesn't lose her library card.

However, I do not feel that she falls into the category of troubled genius, whose giftedness almost amounts to SN. BUT I am convinced that there are such children and that this section offers their parents much needed support.

This latter group has very little to do with the 10% identified by the schools. They are the ones I called square pegs in round holes. I certainly did not mean to imply that every child identified in the top 10% is a square peg- and I don't think many Mumsnetters think so either.

[Elkat]

Cory - actually I think you were right first time! As a teacher I do find that the top 10% can somtimes be a bit of 'square pegs in round holes'. No, they might not be academic geniuses, but they still tend not to fit into the 'norms' of teaching, and so do still pose a problem for teachers. Take for example, a lovely G&T lad I taught a few years back. He was G&T bright, not a genius, but bright enough. Problem was that when I started teaching a topic, he already knew all of it and so either he spent all of the classes just treading water and confirming what he already knew and understood, or I had to find new and different work for him. In that sense, he was a square peg in a round hole because none of the work I prepared for the class was particularly appropriate for him, and I had to spend most of the year finding different, more advanced work for him to do alongside the rest of the class. He is now doing very well at Oxbridge, and all the very best to him... but he was a challenge all year, as I often find my very best Oxbridge students are. I also find that my 'Top 10%' have completely understood the theory and are ready to move on and critique it before my weaker students (often most of the class) have even got their heads around what the theory is even about. To that extent, they can be a real challenge and are genuinely 'square pegs in round holes' although I should imagine nowhere near to the same extent as a genius child (not that I have ever had the luxury of teaching one!). And this is only at 'A' level, where according to many mums on this site they have 'all evened out' by then (which is most definitely not the case!!!)

[Simao]

I was not so sure about all this G&T stuff, but the other day i left the room few a few minutes - leaving my 7 month old baby in a safe place - and when i returned i was shocked to see that she had created a matching pair of Faberge eggs using only basic household items. This was very impressive and unless i am mistaken they are perfect examples of Russian Easter Ostrich Swarovski Faberge Eggs.

[img]www.top-faberge.com/images/stockpix/200704252322530.16m.jpg[/img]

[Simao]

I was not so sure about all this G&T stuff, but the other day i left the room few a few minutes - leaving my 7 month old baby in a safe place - and when i returned i was shocked to see that she had created a matching pair of Faberge eggs using only basic household items. This was very impressive and unless i am mistaken they are perfect examples of Russian Easter Ostrich Swarovski Faberge Eggs.

www.top-faberge.com/images/stockpix/200704252322530.16m.jpg

[cory]

Yes, Elkat, it does pose some problems for the teacher, but what I meant was that many bright-but-not-square-peg children can sort themselves out. I knew several subjects better than the teachers when I was at school, but spent a lot of time finding extra work for myself. And even if I got bored at school, I could stretch myself in my spare time by inventing my own problems, borrowing from the grown-up section of the public library, writing stories, teaching myself extra languages etc. And these days you can get so much extra information on the internet. For somebody who does not have any social or emotional problems but is simply very bright, I don't think the teacher should necessarily have to do everything. Learning to look after yourself is an important life skill.

The real support should go to children who have the talent but not the skills to be independent.

[onefunkymama]

I don't understand this gifted and talented thing. Am I the only one who thinks that 'Gifts' and 'Talents' don't always show themselves until a child is a lot older (I would never have been labeled gifted or talented at music, in fact even got chucked out of dance for having NO ability, but here I am an adult who very successfully, writes music for children and teaches dance.) Early music lessons (by which I mean below the age of 10, might have stopped my interest. Labeling kids young is not really of any great benefit to them as it closes as many doors as it opens. The govt might be better to simply ask what area you would like to see your child recieve extra tuition with!

[lijaco]

Exactly my point really I know so many people who didn't achieve anything at school but are now extremely gifted and talented. Early participation in extra activities, lessons etc isn't ok for a lot of children as a lot of children don't develop fully until after the age of ten. These kids generally take over the fast early developers. Most people who post on here though think that teachers should just focus on their child and not the other 30 ungifted and talentless! The non achievers are usually so because of the learning styles in schools. In my opinion they are the square pegs in round holes. The hare and the tortoise story is very true. The label should be stopped because of this. It causes unequal opportunities rather than equal.