Do you tell people your child is considered G&T?

[Northernlurker]

Becauyse dh and I don't. We are very proud of dd1 of course and try to encourage her as much as we can without being pushy. All our daughters are amazing - we don't need the G&T label to know that! I just don't feel the need to tell people - and I couldn't in any case find the words to do so without sounding boastful!

Part of me thinks that maybe I should be more publicly effusive about it though - what do others do?

I don't think you will ever find that I have said a G&T kid should take the funds from a SN kid. What I believe should happen is that G&T kids and SN kids and kids in the middle - everyone in fact - should have the opportunity to fulfill their abilities. I know the system we have now is not able to do that - why else do you suppose that so many children end up going to private schools? But is that right? I thought state education was supposed to be for all, just as the NHS is. Two pipe dreams, methinks.

I can delight in my daughter without feeling the need to inform the neighbours that she is g&t. Talking to her is a delight in itself. Talking about her seems much less important.

About the funding thing, my take on it is:

my dd can support her own giftedness by getting more books from the library, more resources online, writing her own books if need be- she can be responsible for that herself and always has been

but if the school does not install a ramp for her wheelchair, then she is stuck- this is one area where she cannot take responsibility for herself

of course there are cases where g&t goes hand in hand with problems such as social difficulties and concentration problems- these children need support

but that does not mean every gifted child needs support for their giftedness: if they are fortunate enough (as some are) to also have social skills, a great interest in people, a vivid imagination and an ability to organise their own learning, then the need for support would seem minimal

but a wheelchair-bound child will always need to get through the door

lou I agree with you completely regarding fighting for your daughter's needs before g &t. I can alos relate to the pressure you speak of when you said that you nearly bombed your A levels. You sum it up very well.

I haven't told anyone other than in a post here and my Husband and my grown up daughters. I think part of my problem is that when my eldest were young I had a friend who would gush about hers, mine were really struggling and I think that that has left me very reluctant to talk about it. I know it shouldn't have but it made me feel really crap and that I was a useless parent for not having very able children and I would hate to make anyone inadvertently feel that way even though it doesn't make any sense to feel that way. Make sense?

Hey Hassled
thanks for that yesterday . yes the verbal dyspraxia thing is unusual. Lets form a small club

Dumbledoresgirl.
Hesitated to post but proved to be an itch I need to scratch .

I am not trying to fight with you, or pick at your posts and I was just pondering along with the thread. I am sorry you missed that - i was just adding to MPs joke with the 'old' and I think that set the tone for you. You seem to view my posts as hostile and they really are not.

I think education should support all kids where ever they are in terms of ability. I just think resources are pressed and I was just explaining where I personally think the G&T use of the SN label causes some difficulty amongst parents effectively chasing those same resources. That was all.

Oh, coming back to this late so expect to be ignored! I don't say 'but'. There's no 'but' there - they were two separate sentences. So if I'm talking about Maths, I will say that he's really good at it. If we're talking about handwriting, I'll say he's below average. I don't use the 'bad at' bit to qualify the 'good at' bit.

Pagwatch - not hostile towards you at all! I recognised you were teasing me with the reference to being old, and appreciated your other comments was just furthering a debate. I thought I was just doing the same back. I think this is one of those occasions when the internet fails to convey tone to the reader. Perhaps I should use a few more smilies?

Anyway, my point is, no worries mate! I am perfectly happy with what you wrote and did not mean my reply to sound aggressive. From a mother's pov, of course I want to pursue what is best for my children, but from a (ex) professional pov, naturally I agree with you. - just to show no hard feelings!

Gosh, half of that post was completely illiterate

thanks DG !

im tell the world about my daughter cos im proud very proud and i dont care who knows it my son is not as gifter academically but is very sporty and i talk about that just as much.
Some times i have to tell people about my daughter as she doesnt react or answer as a 4 year old does and it puts people on edge that shes having adult conversations ect
If u want 2 tell people then do so dont be ashamed of it ull be surprised on how many people know about things and point you in certain directions for things that can benefit them its the same as talking about my boy and sport and someone saying about a new athletics club opening. The more it is talked about the less taboo the subject will become. As long as there no pressure on ur child to be a nobel prize winner ect the same as a boy playing for man u then wheres the problem.
Sorry to ramble for a while.

just be aware that it can be very boring to have to listen to the ramblings of a proud mother

my dear nephew has an extremely proud mother and I have to admit after 11 years of being told in detail about every area in which he excells, it's become a bit of a family joke

which is not fair on my nephew who is actually a lovely boy

people still get bored hearing about him

and that applies as much to sporting prowess as to academic excellence (she goes on about both)

I think moderation in everything is the way to go

No, I don't use the 'G&T' tag as I'm not sure what I think about it, really - especially in relation to DS, who is only 4 yrs old and so could 'even out' with his peers at any point in the future.

I really hate both the tag 'G&T' and the way it is referred to as a SN. I have a feeling that the terminology DG is referring to isn't 'SN' but SEN (as in Special Educational Need) which is different I think. At least I think of them as different.

The reason I don't like the tag 'G&T' is partly because it describes a child as 'being their ability'. And I also find it a bit weird being a % of a peer group, because you could change peer group and then find you are no longer G&T even though you ability is identical. I much prefer proper differentiated teaching, extending the more able, supporting the less able. My kids' school don't openly do G&T, but they do have a massive spectrum of children, both in terms of ability and also backgrounds, and a higher than average intake of children with SN. But they all seem to be catered for educationally. (It is a state primary btw, but one that doesn't bother too much about govt hoops, so concentrates on the children).

Also, as a teacher, albeit a music one, I think there are very very few children who I have come across who I would say were gifted. 'Clever' children can often do well at something like the piano, without being gifted, especially to begin with. But I'm not sure you can begin to tell who is 'gifted' until later on, when the musicianship begins to come through. So a child can get through the early grades with high marks, flying through them, but actually not be talented at music, but be a bright child. In 12 years of teaching I've probably taught 1 or possibly 2 'gifted' children. But I have taught many whose parents (and a school going on a top 5-10%) would describe their children as such.

I know there are genuinely 'gifted' children. But I don't think these few are the many described by the G&T tag.

MrsMattie makes a good point. Having seen how much dd's friends have changed from the age of 4, I would feel totally if I had gone around then telling people that she is g&t.

All it meant in our circle was that some children were ahead of their peer group at that age. Eight years later, some of these are still doing well academically, others who were not at all thought clever when they were little have suddenly shot ahead and become amazing, yet others have turned out to be perfectly average- they were just early for a few years.

Of course there are children whose early promise is a sign of things to come. But very difficult to know that until later.

cory - exactly! And imagine if you had to go around telling everyone that your child was no longer G&T. It's a nonsense in mind!

I did wonder how those (very few!) of my friends who talked a lot about their dcs giftedness would cope if they were no longer outstanding.

The answer is easy: you find something else that they're good at (or at least that no other child is doing so we can't compare) and talk at great length about how much more important this is than the suaul academic stuff

maybe im being niave here about it all but where do you dram the line here as being gifted and talented or highly superior intelligent (i think its called) after sitting here for a long time reading alot of posts im starting to worry.

Why do you need to draw the line, pickyminx? Surely the important thing is for to enjoy your dd and to make sure she doesn't lose her love of learning and enthusiasm. For that, you don't need to know exactly how intelligent she is. Just see what kind of things she enjoys and make sure she gets a chance to try new ones.

i do completely agree with that i just want to know wether to accept the extra help thats been offered to her or wether to leave her where she is doing what shes doing if she has got a gift i dont want it to go to waste because i ignored it as a mother but if she is just bright then i dont want to push her to far maybe im not very good at explaining myself but im very lost at present and dont know what to do for the best

I don't "get " why there is a need to say gifted at all,[apart from with school staff as relevant] as surely it just means clever and sounds pretentious and precious.

That is what these children are really ~ clever ~ ..gifted is a recent invention and seems to be used mainly by parents who are also teachers[the most competitive parents in the world ime].

I think talented has more value as it may help children[with their self confidence ] who have a high intelligence in a particular area like music but it might not show in usual reading and writing schoolwork.

if you're given extra help- take it!, pickyminx; just keep an eye on her to make sure it happens at her pace and that she is happy

silvercloud, in the Gifted and Talented scheme gifted is used to refer to those with high ability in academic subjects, and talented is used for high ability in areas like music and sport.

Your post seems to suggest that when a child has a high ability in sport he should be called talented but if he has high ability in an academic subject he shouldn't be called gifted. Is that right? If so, why do you think "talented" is appropriate; why not just "good" at football?

Not all academically able children on the G&T are geniuses. The scheme is designed to find those that are. The thinking is that G&T acts as a filter to find the most able kids. That's a given.

But how should parents refer to those children on the G&T who are just clever (especially considering that the system itself calls them gifted)? I'm not comfortable with calling all the top 10% gifted. But we live in times where words are changing in meaning at a faster rate than ever in history. The most mundane things are "awesome", the most backward kids are "challenged" or "disadvantaged", a rubbish man is a "recycling operative". Given word inflation elsewhere the reason why "gifted" causes so much ire is probably because it suggests one is boasting.

The trick maybe to just exert caution as to where you use the term. Individuals have different cut-off points for what they call gifted and some may not consider your child gifted unless she was the only one of her ability in the country. Unfortunately, it's quite a mouthful to qualify it: "she's gifted as defined under the G&T scheme".

What is odd is that even here in the G&T section people have a problem with the term gifted (even though it's surely understood that it's being used as defined under the scheme).

I think there is a problem with the term in that it has been appropriated by the government quite incorrectly.
THere is no way 10% of every class can be 'gifted'. Gifted people are very rare.
In my DCs school we don't do G and T, hadn't heard of it to be honest before MN, and despite the fact that the academic bar is very high and all pupils are working at least a year ahead, there are very few children considered gifted. There's one little chap who plays several instruments, all to at least grade five, and has specialist maths lessons...he's the only one I can think of.And there was another who won a scholarship to every school he applied to go on to. The rest are just bright.
I would worry that coining the term would set up unreasonable assumptions among certain parents and also detract from those children whose true giftedness perhaps needs special assistance.I would also worry that the 10% is quite divisive. What happens if you just miss? Are you untalented?

OFSTED has addressed the problem of what to call these children (in a report about providing for them). They accept that 'very able' or 'high ability' are used

"...as well as that troublesome word 'gifted', with its implications of gifts bestowed intact from on high. The term may be further modified with adjectives: moderately gifted, very gifted, highly gifted, profoundly gifted, seriously gifted, average gifted etc., suggesting the possibility of precise identification along a single spectrum of abilities, usually IQ.

"Nevertheless, as almost all international researchers use the term gifted it would be verging on the deviant to avoid it."

DS1's teacher just told me he has been recognised at G&T

I just needed to tell someone

[proud emoticon]