England’s million brightest pupils will be targeted by a new champion for
gifted and talented children, under plans to ensure that the most able
youngsters make it to university regardless of their social background.
The first priority for John Stannard, a former director of the National
Literacy Strategy, will be to target the 300 secondary schools that up until
now have refused to take part in the government’s gifted and talented (G&T)
programme – often because of ideological opposition to selection.
Mr Stannard’s appointment, made under the personal direction of Gordon Brown,
is part of a drive to extend massively the reach of the G&T programme by
raising the proportion of children selected in each school from 5 to about
10 per cent.
The move reflects government disappointment at progress in the scheme, set up
in 1999 amid concerns that middle-class parents were abandoning the state
sector for private schools because comprehensives were failing to nurture
the most able.
Latest figures show that a significant minority of schools - 9 per cent of
secondaries and 35 per cent of primaries - have still failed to identify any
G&T children, leaving the number benefiting from the extra tuition
offered under the programme stuck at 733,000.
The Prime Minister is determined that all schools should take part to bring
students numbers up to one million of Britain’s eight million state school
population.
Mr Stannard told The Times that his appointment should send out an important
message that state schools would make every effort to cater for the needs of
the brightest pupils.
“There is a purpose in reassuring middle-class parents that goes beyond the
intrinsic value of doing so.
“If you keep depleting the state sector of the more able students then that
depletes the sector right across the board. It means that schools that do
well have a much greater struggle to do so. With a wider range of pupils,
you have a greater pool of ability for raising aspirations,” he said.
Mr Stannard is keen to ensure that bright pupils from socially disadvantaged
backgrounds benefit from the programme. Previous research has suggested that
most participants come from better-off families who can afford fees and
fares to the extra tuition offered under the programme.
He also wants to ensure that those who may be regarded by teachers as
underachievers or even troublemakers are picked up by the scheme.
Current government criteria for identifying G&T children states that they
may “not necessarily be well behaved”, that they may “be bored by routine
tasks” and may “appear arrogant or socially inept”.
“Kids who are very bored can be very stroppy because they do not have enough
to do and they are not catered for by their school. They may not be
recognised as gifted, particularly in areas of social disadvantage,” he
said.
The criteria for identifying children for the programme will include teacher
assessments and diagnostic tests as well as national Key Stage tests that
children sit at the ages of 7, 11 and 14. The scheme applies to children who
are academically gifted or who have a talent in the arts or sport.
The scheme will apply to children as young as 4. They will qualify for summer
schools at universities, as well as extra online tuition, Saturday morning
masterclasses and activities with bright children from other schools.
Lord Adonis, the Schools Secretary, emphasised that there was no hard and fast
criteria for identifying G&T children and said that it would be left to
individual schools to decide precisely how many children to identify.
However, he said that secondary schools should pay particular attention to the
Key Stage 2 results attained by children in the last year of primary school.
He denied that this would put extra pressure on primary school children,
effectively making tests at primary school a university entrance exam.
“It is vital we do more to support able pupils in state schools, particularly
those schools which currently have low numbers going to university,” he
said.
Bright sparks
Children may:
— be good readers
— be very articulate
— give quick verbal responses
— be generally knowledgable
— learn quickly
— be interested in “older” topics
— communicate well with adults
— problem-solve unusually
— be self-taught in their own interests
— have a good memory
— excel at art, music or sport
— have strong views
— have a lively and original imagination/sense of humour
— be very sensitive and aware
— be arrogant/socially inept
— be easily bored by routine
— not necessarily be well behaved or well liked
Gifted and talented underachievers may:
— have low self-esteem
— be confused about their development
— assume a superior attitude
— find inadequacy in others, in things, in systems, to excuse their own
behaviour
Source: Ofsted review of research by Joan Freeman
Umm, Judy, extremely doubting you'll read this, but giftedness is a real phenomenon that affects about 2% of the population. It correlates with things like depression and anorexia as well as academic achievement and intellectual output. In your sixteen years, you've likely encountered many gifted students--but perhaps you refused to recognise that learning came easily to some of them because you feel such a strong sense of championing the hardworkers. Many gifted preteens and teens who have been seriously damaged by psychological issues related to their giftedness feel a similar hostility to those who have been able to work hard and achieve--and who have held them back in classes by not learning as quickly.
I'm posting this in order to counter, for any future readers, the myth that someone has to be profoundly gifted, a prodigy or genius, to be gifted at all. Also, the 1/8 figure may make sense in this case if it's simply seen as a university preparatory programme, not a gifted one.
Amy, Totally not from England,
I was surprised to find that the Government's description of Gifted and Talented pupils (Alexandra Frean November 2nd 2007) exactly fits that of my 30 year old son who has Asperger's Syndrome.
Having achieved a 2.1 at one of the best Scottish universities and post graduate qualifications in librarianship and IT, he is now in a poorly paid part time admin job which barely covers his rent. No one will employ him since he cannot manage interviews.
So let's celebrate and encourage our 'oddball' school students and then....dump them.
I hope that the National Autistic Society's current campaign, Thinking Differently About Autism, has some impact on the future happiness and job prospects of the thousands of intelligent and capable people like him who leave education and are then 'unemployable'. As a nation, will find that increasing numbers of young adults will be in his position as the rates of diagnosis of Autistic Spectrum Disorder in Primary and Secondary schools increases.
Roberta, Manchester, UK
As Frank so laconically puts it gifted children do not need another New Labour moron and yet more millions thrown away on another layer of crap administrators living off the fat of our rapidly increasing tax burden. The answer is a universal 11 plus paper - If you pass you get fast tracked - if you don't its not the end of the world because cream wherever its poured almost always winds up on top eventually.
Philip, Ipswich,
I would be very, very surprised if this country had 1 million 'gifted' children. That number is a gross exaggeration. Having worked in a middle class school for 16 years I have not encountered one. However, there are those who are prepared to work hard in order to succeed. Is this what the Government is talking about? The term 'gifted' in itself creates a false impression and is devisive and provides yet another label for the majority of average kids to strike out against. How the Labour party can condemn Grammar schools at the same time as proposing segregation for the brightest I have no idea. Or maybe I do....Is it called hypocrisy? Typical.
judy, Liverpool, england
In my day they called them Grammar Schools.....
Frank Stratford, Alton, Hants
By Gordon Brown's reckoning 1 in 8 pupils must be ‘gifted and talented’, even after independent sector selection. At most we should be looking at the top 5 percentile of the entire population for labelling and special consideration of this nature. Including 12-15% is as crass as pretending 50% of the population is academically capable of a meaningful university education and condemning vast numbers to a life of permanent debt.
Gordon Brown's free privileged education obviously did nothing to improve his grasp of simple statistics. But it must have dealt extensively with the application of inept social engineering practices to serious cases of chipped shoulder syndrome.
To nurture the brightest and best effectively you must first remove them from an environment of mediocrity. The 'Assisted Places Scheme' was of course quickly killed of by simplistic Labour dogma - perhaps the best example of socialist foot-shooting losing all sight of the objective ever!
Maude Heath, Chippenham, UK
What utter nonsense! Children from poor homes have been going to university for a hundred years. Even to the wondrous portals of Oxbridge, believe it or not.
Perhaps Alexandra failed to notice the underclass during her delightful pleasures of parties, punting and prestige. They were there, however. It is to be hoped that the underclass in question do not, after their glimps of the other world, will see their life as an opportunity to spread learning rather than to regard the less fortunate with disdain.
Mary Robson, Lincoln, Lincolnshire