Help me prove/disprove my theory please!

[pugsandseals]

If you have a G&T registered child, when is their birthday? I have a theory that the younger ones are less likely to be picked as they have to prove they are 2 years (not 1) ahead of their peers to be considered?
Thoughts please!

Well DadAtLarge if your child was truly a level 5 at age 6 in any subject then unusually he is actually properly gifted and not governmentally "gifted" (note the quotation marks ) and probably will not get the best out of any group education system beyond the social skills of course.

He is so not a genius. He has a level of ability that's merely, IMHO, in the top 1-2%, maybe even just the top 5%.

You'd be surprised at how many kids there are at his level of "ability". That he's at his current level of "achievement" is due to a keen interest in the subject and a lot of dad harassment.

And that's the problem - these kids are not being discovered. The G&T is the best we've got to find them. Put the top few in every class on the Register and give them the more challenging resources ... and that'll help draw them out, particularly the ones from disadvantaged backgrounds who may not have had a dad around to harass.

I think you're rather in denial about his abilities DaL. I honestly believe that most schools would say they've never had a child that able before, so it really can't be that commonplace.

So why can't SATS assess children whatever their level? I am truly shocked that year 2's cannot be assessed above a level 3- just how many children are capable of more but not assessed as such? Should I be worried that DD got all level 3's (very easily)?
And I mention SATS levels because as far as I know, it is the only way we have of assessing children in this country- I obviously know that SATS aren't everything!

DAL it is not sad - it is unfortunate. There are a very small minority of truly gifted children. You cannot expect the government to cater for this minority beyond what it does already. Do it yourself already . There is huge scope for sideways stretching - use your imagination.

when sats first came out if a child was very able at ks1 they sat the ks2 papers as well at the end of ks1. And at the end of ks2 they had level 6 extension papers for the very, very able. A few years later it was decreed that ks1 students shouldn't do ks2 papers and the level 6 papers were also withdrawn - (this was since it was decided that schools should concentrate on teaching the basics to the masses & not worry about extending the more able as far as I can tell).

That together with more and more children each year achieving top grades at SATs has ment that a greater number of high ability kids each year are not being tested to the limit of their abilities.

My ds is a september baby

He has just finished year 2. No sats were we are so out of interest I did some stuff at home with him from the SATs practice books they have had in Wilkinsons

Fairly likely I wont be believed if I tell you all what he got but suffice to say
be thrilled if he could start secondary in September - instead of year 3

I am hugely jealous of any parent whose bright child goes to a school where their needs are met

snorkle, maybe I've got a modesty mask, but then I know a few other kids on par with DS. Schools must come across a lot more, they just don't "see" it. I think you underestimate our kids.

thedolly, thanks, I never considered using my imagination. Yes, that'll really help all those intelligent children we are failing.

DAL it is not sad - it is unfortunate.
My DS was miserable, it was heart renderingly sad. I stick by my description.

There may be a small minority of "truly gifted" children but there's a smooth progression from the slightly clever to the "truly gifted" - a point often missed in the debate - encompassing thousands of intelligent children. That's the wider group I'm talking about. It's many of the children in this group the government admits failing.

pugsandseals, SATs is a four letter word to teachers ;) and to be fair, they have a point. However, in the case of your DD it may well be that she's capable of more than an L3. There are so called SATS papers available online for Years 3, 4 and 5. You could download them. Is your DD happy at school? Is she progressing steadily? A little boredom in class is okay but is she excessively bored?

DaL I know a few extremely bright kids too & very often their parents tend to deny their giftedness. You see it on here quite often too, & I reckon it's a British thing.

I do agree though that if you know several kids like that then you instictively feel it shouldn't be that rare, but I'm not totally sure: these abilities seem to cluster in certain populations (eg the Cambridge effect) and there may also be a degree of parental exaggeration in childrens abilities leading you to assume they are more able than perhaps they are.

To say that sideways extension is the same as treading water is very unimaginative DAL .

If by a smooth progression you mean it's a bell shape curve I'll give you that but it's tall and narrow, not short and fat.

Intelligent children are being failed by a blighted classroom experience that is by and large out of the hands of the Government.

A good teacher gives the brighter pupils the more challenging resources as a matter of course - no need for G&T.

I am shocked that you know several children who are at a Year 7 (secondary school entrance year level) at age 6 (year 2/3). I can assure you that that is most unusual.

DadatLarge- yes she is very bored. This is a large part of our reason for finding a new school for her in September. They have promised an assessment beyond just SATS results soon after she joins & I am fairly confident they will stretch her. Would just be interesting to know where she sits on the national curriculum now- might try the papers you suggest!

DAL - I am prepared to bet that if you know several children who are at year 7 leve in maths at 6 years old they aren't all in the same school.

What level is your ds at for literacy, as a matter of interest?

pugsandseals, I'd let her sit those papers but don't lay too much store by what she scores. If you want a fair picture of her ability you're going to have to get her tested by an ed psych, SATs don't do it.

Bear in mind though that there is an undercurrent of ill-feeling here against specialist provision for more able children, maybe even against the children themselves. Many posters in the G&T section in MN aren't parents of G&T children looking for advice, they are people who don't have a gifted child and don't know the first thing about the G&T program. They are here to undermine the scheme, call for its abolition or inform us that teachers are more than capable of catering for the more able children without G&T.

We have teachers here like lijaco, bless her, whose understanding of G&T is about as dismal as her L4 English. And teachers like KembleTwins who thinks SEN is, effectively, Socially and Emotionally Needy. When I explained what it really was she thought I was talking through my hat and somehow got upset that I was insulting SEN children. She has now been pointed to the DCSF definition and after 12 years in teaching finally knows what SEN is.

Most teachers do know about SEN but I'll bet good money that 90% know little to nothing about G&T.

A good teacher gives the brighter pupils the more challenging resources as a matter of course - no need for G&T.
So what's your solution? Exempt good teachers from the programme... or scrap G&T because 3%/8%/14% of teachers are good teachers?

To say that sideways extension is the same as treading water is very unimaginative DAL
Let's face it, sideways extension is teacher speak for keeping children quiet while the teacher gets away without teaching them anything new.

I am shocked that you know several children who are at a Year 7 (secondary school entrance year level) at age 6 (year 2/3)
That's an unusual interpretation seemingly contrived to disparage my credibility. No, they are not all 6 yrs old at L5. It would be shocking if I knew 30 six year olds all ready for secondary school maths. My experience within our friend and family circle of maybe 50-100 kids: An ex-colleague of mine has a 9 nine old boy who a few years ago knocked five quid off me for tearing through some maths puzzles that most 12 year olds would struggle with. DS has an eight yr old cousin who's far quicker with maths than DS ever was. I know a 10 yr old girl whose written English far surpasses the quality I've come to expect on CVs of 16 yr olds with As in GCSE English. The list goes on. snorkle seems to know a few too.

But I support the government and the G&T programme's goal of helping the wider group, the whole top 5%/10%/15% - "the most able" - move out of the rut they're in. These are the children who will be shouldering a disporportionate responsibility paying for your pension and mine, contributing to the mission to Mars, advancing medical science, saving the Earth and even paying for tomorrow's SEN budget.

A significant number of posters on her have children who are gifted and talented according to the current definitions. Very few have truly gifted children, like yours, DAL, or pagwatch's ds - because there are very few children like them in the country!

In my mind sideways extension is for the benefit of gifted children in the hope of keeping them working and learning within their peer group. A simple example should suffice. Let's say the rest of the class are working on understanding the value of British coins (5 x 20p = £1 etc). SonAtLarge could be working on other currencies and the concept of exchange rates.
OK, so it's not on the NC but that doesn't matter - does it?

And DAl has never, as far as I know, said anything about his boy's gifts in other areas - too chastizing primary schools for not automatically being able to deal with a seriously gifted 6 year old mathematician.

too busy chastizing...I meant!

I ofetn wonder of the answer lies not in encouraging particular children to forge ahead in say one or two subjects but to broaden the curriculum.
My children attend a school with a ridiculously broad curriculum. The academic subjects are taught very rigorously from a young age including french, latin, greek etc. Apart from the least able children everyone seems to keep up - and this is not a highly selective school.
In addition the academic subjects are bolstered with hours of art,music, philosophy, drama etc. Every day they get an hour with their form master or mistress when the class decide what to study. They also do proper sport every day.
I have never, ever heard any parent say their child is bored or frustrated, no matter how able. To be honest you'd have to be very very boring to get bored in this environment.
Now I know a state school probably can't compete with the facilities etc but perhaps a little less rigidity and teaching to the test ( which frankly, I don't think you can blame teachers for in the current league table frenzy) would make the whole experience more interesting for pupils of all levels.
Just a thought.

True Seeker, in our case it's just normal g&t. Was identified in top 5% nationally for science and maths, just above average for english. That was 4 yrs ago and since then she is now on target to get A* in English too. Her English teacher described her as highly intelligent. Not boasting just explaining what has happened.

So well within the norm and not needing any extention work. She has been to the theatre with school and got a taste for culture etc all within in normal cirriculum so I don't have any complaints at all.

Even though I know she is capable, she has let things slip and without putting the revision in she won't shine. I am on the case but at her age it is up to her iyswim.

DadAtLarge-
You know a lot about the subject and I am very grateful for your advice & will see how she gets on at her new school.
My experience of her last school (and it sounds like schools you have mentioned) is that there is much criticism of any child nearer the top end of ability levels! Parents evenings and teacher meetings seem to revolve around how socially unaware our children are in comparison to those lovely 'average' children in the class. If you mention your child being stretched (in any direction), the only answer you get is 'if we do that now, x will just be bored next year instead'.
I am not sure how widespread this problem is, but it certainly doeasn't seem to be a minority view. Whether teachers just find these children hard work, or just don't like intelligent children I don't know. But this view of leaving them to their own devices 'because they know it all' is unacceptable in my opinion. However, I don't know how we can change it! Whatever happened to the country who was proud of academic excellence?

"Parents evenings and teacher meetings seem to revolve around how socially unaware our children are in comparison to those lovely 'average' children in the class."

It is always possible that the child in question is actually socially unaware - would you expect the school to ignore this? Isn't it a good idea to focus on the areas where a child needs to do some work, rather than racing ahead to GCSE maths in year 5?

Schools are about more than academic work!

And DAl has never, as far as I know, said anything about his boy's gifts in other areas, he's too busy chastising schools...
A child doesn't need to be "gifted" in multiple areas before we start catering for their ability. DS got a 3A in all subjects at KS1 which means of course that he's at a minimum of 3A, my guess is that he's at least a 4B in Literacy. But why does the fact that I don't drone on and on about DS's breadth of ability somehow invalidate my criticism of schools?

too busy chastizing primary schools for not automatically being able to deal with a seriously gifted 6 year old mathematician
Something seems to be lost in the translation or you are mischievously misreading my posts. Though English isn't my first language, I feel my posts are clear enough in the point about whom the system is failing. What I've been "busy doing", if it's not obvious, is pointing out that many schools don't deal properly with the wider group of intelligent children (not the one particular "seriously gifted mathematician"). I appreciate that if you pigeon-hole the inadequate provision as affecting only the most gifted then it does make it easier to advance your defence that the system can't be expected to cater for everyone at the extremes of high ability.

(I can't help wondering if you'd take the same approach about children at the other extreme - low ability.)

thedolly, I accept what you're saying. My wife (a qualified teacher) and I have researched a lot of the extension material DS's school uses for that age. I'm not saying they learn absolutely nothing in "sideways extension" but they learn less in quantity terms than their peers and they learn it at a snail's pace - exactly the pace that's counter to their proper development. In practice, SE is used to keep them quiet - to give them a worksheet or two while the teacher gets on with teaching the rest.

As Litchich says, broadening the curriculum would give intelligent children a chance to do the learning their brains crave, but there is a resource issue. I've said before that we need to use the resources we've got first before we try to make an argument for more money. Like the resources in G&T.

pugsandseals, don't get me wrong, there are good schools and good teachers out there. I wish your DS all the best in her new school.

I've pointed out the "she'll be bored next year" issue here before and it was pooh-poohed. Apparently that doesn't happen and teachers don't think that way.

Agree with Seeker and Litchick

My DC's went to a one form entry primary school slighly better than average performance.

DD 11 is considered "superbly bright" "brilliant" "multi talented" "gifted at maths and excells at all other subjects" by the teachers she had in her time there.
Up until last year parents evening have been about her handwriting and presentation, because that's where she needed to improve so that other people could actually read what she had to say. She tends to make mistakes because she rushes everything, so she has had to learn to slow down.
She never needed stretching upwards because she is so interested in everything else ie history, science etc and from what I can gather she gives as much to the lessons as much as she takes out. They use her to bounce off of, if the class is needs livening up. This is a very ordinery little primary, nothing special but neither my "very bright" dc's have complained about being bored.