More able child - education psychologist and school help

[Amumhere]

Hello everyone,
I am seeking advice for our child who will be four next month. She will start reception in September. We (as well people who know her) believe that she is of high ability.
Couple of things which indicate the same are - she spoke early (at 7 months of age), by 15 months she was bilingual and speaking in sentences. She taught herself to write before she turned three and taught herself to read couple of months after she turned three. She is nearing four now and can read a lot and very fast. She is good with numbers, can do basic addition , subtraction. She also has an amazing memory. For example she knew my phone number when she was two simply from overhearing me tell it to someone. We haven't done much. It's all been self initiated, with us providing her access to resources.

We are considering consulting a private education psychologist to understand more about her and what best we can do for her. She will most likely start reception in an outstanding state school (we are very close to it). While the school is considered very good in the area, it doesn't do much for more able children. So I think seeking help from a professional will also help us in advocating for her when needed. We are new in the country and don't really know how to go about it. Will really appreciate recommendations from your personal experience or from people you know.

Also, we are considering buying home next year (right now we are renting) and want to know if there are any schools in London which cater to high ability kids better compared to other schools? We want to shortlist areas where we can consider buying.
We have thought of independent schools but it seems like we won't be able to afford them. Unless they provide scholarships based on ability. Do some schools provide that? We don't think we will quality for bursaries based on our financial situation.

We are really confused right now. Looking to get help from parents who have been through the same.

I know it's just reception right now. But we want her to be an environment where she is understood and where she can retain her curiousity.

Thanks for your time. We really appreciate your inputs.

School called in the ed psych for ds because they didn't know how to cater for him. He was so far outside of what they were used to. Ds loved school, he saw it as a great opportunity to spend time with his friends and having fun. Looking back I suppose I could have been more pushy and demanded they challenged him but I didn't because ds was happy so it didn't seem important and he learned what he wanted without schools input anyway.

My dd has gone through bad years (no friends, very isolated, being used for her ability in the classroom but dropped like a hot potato in the playground) but also had some good years st primary school (though even in those she was often bored and frustrated). I don’t know if keeping her there was the right decision for her - it was for the family.

She is going to a super selective school next year (secondary). So, no, they don’t ‘all even out’. I’m hoping that will be a better fit for her, socially as well as academically.

Hi OP

Your child sounds very impressive.

Re independent schools, I don’t think I have ever heard of any that offer scholarships to Reception children. There are a few that offer them from 7+ - it’s an old post but there is some stuff on that here.

It may be worth getting hold of a copy of the Good Schools Guide for North London / South London - each entry mentions whether scholarships are offered (I think).

I've worked in some of the most selective schools in the country and have taught plenty of exceptionally gifted children. I've also taught plenty of children who looked like they were going to be exceptionally gifted in early primary, were told so (unfortunately) and when they ended up averagely bright neither they nor their parents could cope. These have been some of the saddest situations I've had to deal with pastorally.
I'd say send her to school, interest her in other stuff outside (music lessons, museums, projects together) and don't worry about it just yet. Ed Psych isn't worth it until she's actually started school because unless they can see how she is getting on in her school environment they can't give any specific advice - so hold fire on that until she's at school and you've spoken with her teacher about whether it's actually necessary. At 11 you'll probably want to think about selective school (grammar or scholarship for selective independent) but until then just have fun learning with her.

I agree with Justrichmal; it defies logic to say a child taught themselves to read and write. As to the interpretation of that phrase, it is what it says. If parents mean their child picks up things quickly when shown or taught, then say so. Better to use precise language. English is a wonderfully versatile language. The words to accurately describe how the child is learning exists. Why say they teach themselves then say that's not literally what is meant? Just say literally what is meant and there'll be no problem and Justrichmal will have nothing to complain about

Schrodingers in your experience as a teacher, do you think schools are good at coming up with differentiated work for pupils? Is it down to the individual teachers or would you say some schools have better policies and structures in place to challenge if the brightest of pupils out of curiosity?

I think children who teach themselves to read are simply better at making connections. They will watch programs with letter sounds, look at letters pointed at in a book, make the connection between the letter and the sound (that's the easy bit) and be able to blend the sounds (hard bit). I don't think a child can self teach, if they don't have any exposure to the link between the shape of the letter and the sound, and the sounds making a word.

That said, I think that some primary schools have better provisions for children who have SEN, and for children who are high achievers. In my experience, if a school is good with SEN kids they will be good with more able kids. Also, in my experience, larger primary schools have more provisions, TAs, specialist teachers, resources and space, as well as training etc. to cater for more able children. Smaller one-form entry schools can't pool together children with higher abilities so they stand out a lot more, can become isolated and struggle to make friends.

I saw this with DS at primary school he really struggled to make friends, in a one-form entry. He was the only one in with high potential and although most teachers would cater for him, he was often on his own. The very first day that he started large, very good secondary school everything changed. He made friends, joined clubs, excelled in his areas and received plenty of acknowledgement and rewards for his work. He met kids with similar interests. Much happier in a big school.

Should have said his school is just a regular state school, not a selective school.

This is a fascinating thread. Just to add my own ten pence worth, DS1 could read long before he could talk - he has turned out to be quite severely autistic and also has hyperlexia. He attends a special school. DS2, on the other hand, started talking fairly late - quite possibly because his older brother wasn’t talking - just after his 2nd birthday. He started school unable to read. It’s DS2 who has since been registered as G&T. He’s not remotely any kind of genius, but is very bright, top of year group, competes in inter-county maths competitions etc in spite of being summer born. So it’s not just the early readers and early talkers who go on to be bright.

From what the OP says, it sounds like she has an extremely bright little girl. I wouldn’t say there are any signs of hyperlexia there.

Catkin your DS2 sounds gifted to me! For me though gifted is top 1 percent rather than genius

@queenblueberries, thanks for sharing your experience. I noticed the same when I toured schools. Larger schools seemed to have more resources. So we did give a larger school as our first priority, but we are closest to the smaller school. So our chance of getting in the smaller school is higher. Both are state schools and outstanding schools. I am hoping it all works out for our daughter. It gets confusing since if we decide to move (to buy), then we can't just wait and watch.

I understand that kids need exposure to books to be able to read. I assumed it was a given that I didn't hand the first book to her after she turned three and she looked at it and started to read. I meant that I didn't teach her to read.

Thanks @crucru. I will look at the guides.

@schrodingers, thanks for your input. I am curious as well that if some schools have better policies than others in recognizing and helping kids with different ability levels.
We are looking to move (to buy) and would prefer to move close to a school which is known to have helped kids with higher abilities (not by pushing them but by just recognizing the differences and assisting accordingly). Do such schools exist and is the information available anywhere? I do understand that moving close to a school doesn't guarantee admission of course.

Thanks @catkin. I am happy that your ds2 has found an environment which is working well for him.

@zooop, hope the secondary school works out well for your daughter.
I am so sorry that it didn't work out so well for her in her primary school. That's what worries me the most. Finding supportive teachers and peers are so important.

Mama1980
If your child is at top 0.5 percentile (mine is too) then his school must have been pretty rubbish not to be able to cater for his needs. That is only 1 in 200 children. So in a two form entry primary school statistically they'd expect to have a child this able every 4 or 5 years; they would probably have 1 or 2 in the school at any time. In a 1000 place high school he'd statistically only be top 5. Obviously some schools have lower average cohorts and some higher, so in a mc leafy suburb this would be more common.

"He's taking his GCSE s at 11 with the support of a tutor at Cambridge.
I chose not to explore the option of private schools etc as I wanted him to have the freedom to just be a child without test pressure and not to be 'pushed' into academia if that wasn't something he wanted"

Aren't these two sentences mutually incompatible? If he was at a private school I highly doubt he'd be taking GCSEs at 11! My top 0.5 percentile DS is at his local secondary school and will be taking GCSEs in year 11 like his pals. I appreciate we all do what we think is right for our children, good on you, but own it!

Floating I don’t know what centile my child is in terms of ability (the only guide I have is that she got into a school where rumour has it you need to be scoring 135 on CATs). But my experience is that most NQTs and some more experienced teachers can’t cope with the 1 in 200 level of outlier. That’s what I was saying above.

However good the school, if the class teacher (in a state primary, where that’s by far their main teacher) can’t differentiate to that degree, they are likely to be unchallenged and (in my DC’s case) miserable. My experience is that, however good the school, the individual teacher is what makes the most difference.

The teachers who’ve taught similar children before usually have a box of tricks (maths extension puzzles, more complex comprehensions, science investigations that take a bit more thought etc) which they dip into as needed. The others don’t, and you end up in the ridiculous position of your child either pretending to get things wrong, finishing very fast and then reading (ending up reading more than a book a day) or learning that it’s more fun to muck around / chat.

I think the main problem my DS has had is that he has not ever really learned to fail or to try hard.

Agree with others that within a good or outstanding school, there will be teachers who are more experienced and understand G&T children better, and cater for them. DS scored 138 at CATS beginning of year 7 so he is within the top, what, 2%, and scored 119 average in his end of y6 in SATS exams (by the way, he had his first word at 2.5 and first sentence at 3, so early language skills are not always a valid indicator). His worst year in primary school was with a (very young, popular and well loved) NQT who decided to mix all abilities on each table, rarely provided extensions, was highly creative with the children and had little structure to the day/method of learning. DS was miserable.

A good teacher would, for example, give pretty much everyone the same work but would ask children to come up with a different way or method to come up with the answer. If they were teaching one method for maths, they would encourage more advanced children to invent, have a go at making up their own method. it's not just a case of giving them an extra worksheet. Extensions were provided for homework as well as class work. But in the end, each teacher is in charge of their class so it's hard to guarantee that within a very good school, all teachers will be good with G&T children.

@amumhere and Londongirl, in honesty (And probably not a politically popular view, but from experience), a school with a good AGT framework can't ever do more than remind the teachers and encourage them to put on extension activities. Ime, it's less policies and more to do with the culture of the school and the individual teachers. Two things I would say make a big difference to AGT pupils at secondary level are academically selective schools, or at least class streaming by ability (although that tends to vanish in mainstream for GCSE options). Even the best teacher has only so many hours in the day, and if you have a class with a range if behavioural and learning problems, you just can't spread yourself far enough. Also, it's really good for brighter children to bounce off each other.
The other thing is having actual subject specialists teaching each subject. If you've got a History teacher teaching Geography, they will be less able to stretch the bright ones in that because they don't have the subject knowledge. I strongly feel non subject specialists shouldn't be teaching above year 8 due to this. Unfortunately the state sector in particular (And even some indies) are so short staffed and underfunded that this happens a lot now.
Again, primary school i would say don't worry too much, just have fun learning with her outside school.

QueenBlueberries at cat score of 130 is circa top 2.5 percent to 138 is less than 1 percent of the population.

Floating I’ve seen the consequences of never being challenged in primary school for people close to me and I think that’s what I’m keenest to avoid though the impact seems to be mitigated a lot by personality among other things.

I agree with the posters who have said that schools struggle to challenge highly able kids. The thing is, some with an IQ of 130 is 2% (about 1 in 50) but someone with an IQ of 145 is 0.1% (1 in 741), and there is as much of a difference between those levels as between a child of 115 (1 in 6 - so still roughly top table if such things exist). So, whilst schools might be able to cope with a child who is in the top 2%, the needs of an exceptionally bright child are just in a different realm altogether. It is entirely unreasonable for a primary school to be expected to cater for a child who learns and understands 3 times as fast as most children, and who could (and should) be doing work that is 4+ years ahead. That is the issue for me. I don't think that any one teacher could really deal with that. It isn't about good teachers or bad. It is just about realistic expectations.

I do think that it is a very fine line between support and pressure. I do very much agree that happiness is crucial. However, there is a problem with being bored in school. And there is a problem with very able children being under-challenged. The degree of the problem will be a balance between the quality of the teacher and the degree to which the child is an outlier in the class/school.

With regards to the questions about testing, there are weaknesses with IQ measures. For neurotypical children I think they are potentially more reliable (generally they are considered to be reliable from about 7). They can be a useful tool if the school are struggling to meet the needs of a child. Schools often don't believe the degree of difference (in my experience). But ultimately, it is very true that happiness and social skills are the most important skill. But a bored child is less likely to be happy.

I really think that people who state that overachieving children are in danger of being bored with school,... every child is in danger of being bored with school! Those who are struggling will be bored at school, those in the middle will also be bored in lessons they don’t like. It’s unfortunately something that we all have to deal with growing up and our children have to deal with. I think it’s very unfair to expect that a high achiever will be constantly stimulated, challenged and pushed in order not to be bored, they wouldn’t have time to develop social skills, have fun with their friends, get better at sports, etc.

Personally I haven’t relied on the school too much to provide extra. We have always done a lot at home (games, maths games, reading challenging books, learning facts, history stuff, I don’t know, anything. DS can identify most countries’ flags for example. Not that useful but good party trick). He plays 3 musical instruments, is learning other instruments on his own, he is good at drawing.

So first we have to assume that most children will be bored at school at one point or another. Secondly, that schools will only provide what they can in today’s context and please don’t assume that children who misbehave are smarter but bored, or that high achieving kids will automatically be bored at school so we need to push push push.

Bored because a topic doesn't interest you is not the same as bored because of chronic understimulation. Nobody would expect a standard year 4 child to be happy spending all of their time in Y2 maths lessons, for example.

Also, I don't think anyone has said that children should be constantly challenged and pushed. Simply that they shouldn't have to twiddle their thumbs through daily maths. That isn't to say that other subjects aren't impacted but I do think differentiation can be easier in other subjects, particularly from KS2. Highly able children have a right to learn in school - irrespective of what parents do outside. Not all children have parents who can or want to commit to stimulating them outside school.

Queen I agree, but there is a particular form of boredom that’s being told (slowly and with repetition) things that you already know. Multiple times. I had it happen to me on a training course recently, and I was surprised how strong my emotional reaction was (I had to completely detach from the room and the speaker to avoid either getting cross or crying with sheer frustration at the inanity and neverendingness of it). I’ve been more sympathetic to my DC since then!

One of them has the sort of memory that allows her to quote verbatim from conversations (annoyingly, she remembers stuff I said years ago and quotes it back to me) and so I’m fairly sure that I am hearing what goes on in the classroom.

Having said that, we did go the enrichment with music, sport and other extracurricular stufff route, and used school for socialisation and covering the National Curriculum. But I’m keenly aware that has come at a cost to the DC. Maybe one that’s worth it - but I do sometimes wonder if they would have had more fun, more friends and just as much socialisation at a different school.