What is it about G&T that is so contriversal?

[DidEinsteinsMum]

Okay trying to get my head round this and hoping it doesn't get too ugly What is it about G&T that is so contriversal - the definition, the application of policy?
Go on let rip ...

...you know you want to

(please try not to get to personal is not a vendetter thing - just want to get an over view and an understanding)

missmem, ds taught himself algebra. Bright children often can look at a problem, understand what's required & just do it. He's also taught himself trigonometry (from a murderous maths book) and answered (correctly) some easy calculus questions without having learnt it at all (I really wouldn't have thought calculus was something you could just intuit, but there you go).

No teacher input or qualifications necessarily required. A good teacher should still endeavour to make lessons more engaging for him however.

Cory, when you have a child who is years ahead in maths (an example) and is about Year 6 level by reception. When they come home they are just far too tired at age 4 to do more work after spending a long day at school. Yes my kids would come home and stimulate themselves (usually on the Dicovery or Nat Geo channel) and are way ahead in many things but I don't know of many kids or parents who would want to get maths books out after dinner each evening. So unless I send him to a tutor or try and do stuff in the holidays then he will not learn anymore maths/chemistry etc because it doesn't fit in with our lifestyle or priorities. So I'm not bothered that he doesn't get extended but I am annoyed about this "even out" argument.

My son is not happy with the situation at school. He sits and makes up his own chemical equations in his maths book and gets into trouble when he has to do 2+2 and he does it but then puts about 10 examples of what he can do with a 2 i.e. square it, stick it into a simultaneous equation, write something about the meaning of 2 in greek times. I don't know what he's talking about half the time and when he gets home he just wants to unwind his frustration and get stimulation from the pc and tv.

Apart from the bullying- where it seems to me, the bullies are at least half the problem- is it also the case that having a gifted child is perceived as a problem partly in proportion to how difficult you find it to supplement their needs at home, and how much you enjoy the continuous discussions and backchat.

For myself, I have to say, it is a relief on days when undergraduates (or even occasion academic colleagues) appear particularly obtuse, to know that there is someone at home that I can have an intelligent discussion with, and who is likely to spot any weakness in my argument. Even when she was two and asked of every statement of mine 'how do you know, have you read it in the paper? have you read it in a book?', I found it very refreshing to come home to after a day spent with people whose only question is likely to be 'will this come up in the exam?' Someone I can take to shows and watch films with and share things that I enjoy. Someone who makes it worth going the extra mile, because I can add to her enjoyment.

Is this a very selfish way of looking at things? Should I see more problems and not concentrate on the fun all the time?

Snorkle, I gave DS an A'level maths book the other day because his brother needed some help and had to do some work and was upset that brother was doing what he wanted. He got the topic straight away and got about 80% on the question section in the book. So he is gifted as how could he get something 10 years before his time but does he want to get it - no. I don't think not having the desire to learn does not mean you aren't truly gifted. I've heard this argument too. The fact is every gifted child is different and there are levels of giftedness, although I never think a kid is gifted if they are only between 1-2 years ahead.

I know what you mean cory. Ds has the odd occasion when he comes out with something really thought provoking, 'if you had to create a brand new society, how would you start and what sorts of people would you need in it?' It does make you think on a whole new level which is really good. It's nice being able to share ideas with them, I do feel uneasy about this at times though, I wouldn't want ds to be a mini-me.

I thought this was going to be a thread about gin and tonics

I didn't say that he can't be gifted if he doesn't want to learn, missmem. I said that I have no experience of a gifted child who doesn't want to learn. My argument all along has been that gifted children are alll different and you can't make blanket statements about them all.

To back away from individual situations and respond in general terms - I think G&T is contravertial because it is a poorly thought out and poorly actioned policy.

The notion of giving extra positive support to advanced children is not really a problem for most. But then this rubs up against a policy where they allocate a fixed percentage of children to fall within that bracket so that makes it just a numerical knee jerk excercise ratherthan actually finding gifted kids and carving the support they need.
Being labelled as gifted becomes about being picked as the elite 10% rather than a true acknowledgement of a child with abilities way above and beyond their peers.

Then add into the mix the current obsession amongst parents for your child to be 'special'. So children placed on the G&T register will sometimes ( and i mean only sometimes) have unfortunately pushy parents or, worse still, those who regard a childs abilities as being a reflection upon them and will boast about it. As boasting is commonly viewed negatively parents in RL will often cloak boasting as pseudo difficulties such as 'gosh my DD is just finding french so so easy so I thought Sopanish or German may help stop her becoming too bored. Do you have many language choices for the under 5's...'
(note that was a genuine very loud conversation a woman had in our local bookshop )

So then the parents of genuinely gifted children who genuinely do face real challenges with their children, come on here and they are unlikely to find a true audience when so many are just tired of the competeive parenting nonsense they meet in RL.

I suspect the truth is the the policy is close to causing more harm than good now, catering too closely to needs of the aspirational parent rather than the truly gifted child.

But then what do I know

"I don't think not having the desire to learn does not mean you aren't truly gifted" I didn't say all gifted kids have a desire to learn did I? If I did, I didn't mean it - I know it's not always true - I think kerrymumbles ds fustrates her in a similar way sometimes for example. A lot of them do though and of the ones that don't I don't think it's always the right thing to push them. In truth it's a real dilema what to do with very advanced children and I suspect there isn't a one size fits all solution, but I don't think lumping them in with a load of other 'bog-standard bright' rather than really gifted kids will do very much to help.

Do you think your ds should want to learn A level maths because he's able to? It's an interesting question - should we develop a talent because it's there or only if the child wants to? I gravitate to the latter opinion myself.

I think I agree with you pag. (& well done for steering the thread back on track).

Cory: I have experience of a gifted child who doesn't want to learn. Not entirely true - she does learn but likes to dumb down. Her results are nothing like you would expect from her 99-percentile rating but, hey, it's above a C so the teachers are pleased ...

I'm sure my son would cope with A level maths. He's 10 and picks things up really quickly but it would be unfair to do this to him. School's important, if he's bored because he has nothing to do then where will he go from here?

"unless I send him to a tutor or try and do stuff in the holidays then he will not learn anymore maths/chemistry etc because it doesn't fit in with our lifestyle or priorities."

fair enough

but if you put his enjoyment of his intellect that low on your list of priorities, aren't you perhaps expecting a bit much of a teacher whose class of 30 children all have to be regarded as priorities?

in my childhood , a lot of our intellectual stimulation came naturally from the things we did anyway: bake a cake as part of our chores but doubling the quantities, using a compass and a map when out for a Sunday outing, designing a toyboat and then building it out of bits of wood

educational no doubt, but noone told us that

and simply our parents talking to us about what was going on in their lives because they enjoyed it and wanted our views on everything

it doesn't have to carry a label and be part of a curriculum to be educational

[grin at snorkle

The getting thread back on track thing didn't last so very long did it ?

Sorry Snorkle and Cory, I actually wasn't having a go or saying that you were saying this and that. Just that I'd heard these arguments and they annopy me!

What I think is this...

For the top 10% the curriculum needs an overhaul so that there are more stretching targets. They've tried to do this a A level with the new A* grade - whether it works or not remains to be seen, but if the exam structure can be set so that it's not so easy to get top grades and there is some challenge for the top 10% then this should filter down into day to day classroom teaching too.

That won't help those very few truely exceptional children who I think really need individualised plans, and I'm not really sure what would need to be in those plans. But this would be a very small number of children who are failed by the normal classroom environment (and I don't mean those who are a bit bored sometimes - that would be nearly everyone!).

snorkle makes an interesting point- should a child learn a particular thing because we decide they can, or because they genuinely want to

haven't got the answer, but have noticed that UK society is far more polarised than some other cultures as to what is considered worthwhile activities

many parents here assume that if you are very bright, then time spent learning other than the most obviously academic things is time wasted

where I was brought up, there was a much more seamless continuum of valuable activities, with maths and literacy merging into things like outdoor activities, crafts, cookery, the arts- each feeding off the other

I spent a lot of time as a child learning to read and write foreign languages, and reading an inordinate amount of classical literature and history

but I must have spent at least as much time learning to sail a boat, baking biscuits, tracking in the woods and trying to play various instruments, or dressing up and making up plays

noone ever suggested that as I was obviously academically gifted, other types of activities would be a waste of intellect; we never thought in those terms

and in fact, music is known to be a way of stimulating the mathematical side of one's brain

agree with snorkle's 14:18 post.

absolutely no problem with offering genuine help for those who genuinely need it

I ment to add that I think this would be less controversial too.

I'm not sure about your comment on practical applications, cory. I know a lot of G&T parents who really appreciate the practical arts because it allows their DC free rein. If you get 100% in a Maths exam, then what? You can't get better than 100%. But a practical project has no bounds and is a real boon for a G&T child who wants to go that further mile.

we do actually get a lot of posts in this forum, iam, where parents assume that their child is bound to be miserable and bored if they (or more often the school) cannot stimulate them in one partcular tiny area

I am sure these are not typical of all g&t parents in RL, but it does always seem odd to me

if your child is mathematically gifted, surely the first step should be to encourage them to take up an instrument, or to get involved in household mathematics, or anything practical that uses technical skills

stretching sideways instead of just forwards

my nephew is mathematically gifted and his father is very very good at maths

but instead of tutoring him up to college level, he has taught him to play chess, and let him have violin lessons, and learn basic composition techniques, so he can write his own music

so the same part of his brain is being stretched but in ways that won't leave him totally out of synch with the school

What controversy? Parents of gifted children aren't arguing against parents of other gifted children.

"But I think there is an unspoken resentment that children who are already advantaged by being more able, get special treatment to give them a further advantage."
When that special treatment comes out of a budget shared with SEN there is extra resentment. A lot of parents of SEN children struggle to get them statemented and struggle even after that to get the resources. It's with that background they oppose any special treatment for gifted children.

They don't realise that is not all a bed of roses.

The reason why G&T is so controversial on these boards is because parents who don't have G&T kids do so much of posting in G&T actively and passively opposing the need to provide for gifted children. That they may benefit from the scrapping of G&T hardly ever comes up.

The other group who cause the controversy here are some teachers. They stand to gain from less work (and if they work with SEN children then they could benefit from larger budgets). Again, it's not just one or two... but several.

Maybe these groups genuinely feel that gifted children shouldn't get any extra resources. Maybe their personal circumstances have nothing to do with their opinions. It's hard to accept, though, that their positions are unbiased. And, as long as they keep arguing their anti-G&T case in the G&T forum, there'll continue to be controversy.

I have often wondered about this as well - the controversial nature, that is.I am in the US and a friend from abroad explained that it was more of a cultural thing. That people in the UK tend to think of someone who is talking about G&T in the sense that they are boasting. Perhaps that may happen in some cases, but I think most of the time parents truly want and need support from other parents in the same or similar situation. Gifted children can have so many challenges. Since they are ahead of their peers academically it causes social problems for many of them and they can even be behind their peers socially as they tend to be all over the board in terms of development.

Regarding "evening out", it is well-known by professionals in the gifted arena that these children tend to mentally drop out, typically by the third grade, if they are not properly challenged and stimulated.

It really is too bad that threads on this topic tend to degenerate so quickly into people taking the piss. It is a real issue and deserves thoughtful discussion. I know of no other topic on MN where this happens with such regularity

DadAtLarge on Sat 20-Jun-09 21:33:25
"What controversy? Parents of gifted children aren't arguing against parents of other gifted children."

So I don't count? Or you have simply decided that since I don't agree with you, my dd cannot be properly gifted?

There is a very strong tendency for the parents with gifted children on these threads to decide that anyone who questions their idea must be jealous and consequently cannot have a gifted child themselves. Or that if the child does not exactly correspond to your description of your own child (social difficulties, tendency to get bored very quickly etc), then they cannot be properly gifted.