Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Whizz Kid)
    Widomaker: Last Activity: 1 Minute Ago 04:30 PM
    Giving Reputation - 1 Minute Ago

    Gifted Students 19-07-2005 04:31 PM : hmm, too argumentative for my liking

    Rest assured, neg rep is on its way to you.

    BTW:

    Talking of mistakes; since when was "hate football" an interest? Unless you meant that an interest of yours is to hate football? In that case I'd have to say that you should've typed "hating football".

    I can be pedantic as well, you know. :rolleyes:
    lolololol whizz kid hunny I personally never expected anything less than retaliation from ya :p: xoxo
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    I think it's unfair the way that the pupils in lower sets get to go on more trips and get more rewards than people who aim for As and A*s. They admittedly need more help academically, but we try so hard in the top sets and then barely get any 'star points' and therefore get no rewards. It's just wrong the way the system works in my school. It doesn't make the more able students motivated to do well at all.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by xPunkx)
    I think it's unfair the way that the pupils in lower sets get to go on more trips and get more rewards than people who aim for As and A*s. They admittedly need more help academically, but we try so hard in the top sets and then barely get any 'star points' and therefore get no rewards. It's just wrong the way the system works in my school. It doesn't make the more able students motivated to do well at all.
    I agree. But most schools have the sole intention of achieving a higher A-C pass rate, than a A-A* pass rate - that could be why? But I agree it's unfair that more abled students aren't motivated more to achieve what they potentially could.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by xPunkx)
    I think it's unfair the way that the pupils in lower sets get to go on more trips and get more rewards than people who aim for As and A*s. They admittedly need more help academically, but we try so hard in the top sets and then barely get any 'star points' and therefore get no rewards. It's just wrong the way the system works in my school. It doesn't make the more able students motivated to do well at all.
    That is league tables for you. Schools are ranked according to how many people get 5A-C grades and higher ranking = more funding (i think) so they try to make as many C/D type students to get Cs as possible while ignoring any A*-B type people because they will probably get 5Cs even with crap teaching and no rewards

    Stupid system
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Carrying on from what someone said about people who only excel in one or two sybjects: that's true... only the teachers who teach you in that subject can know how good you are, and often don't do much about it.

    Some people also excel in things that are "sort of" academic, but aren't in the school curriculum. For example in music, poetry, non-school related sport. Their achievments aren't given any reward, even if they help the school's reputation.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by stratomaster)
    My high school had the "gifted and talented" cohort, they'd organise a few trips or what not.

    In college we have the "pre oxbridge group" for people's who's gcse results would put them in the frame to apply to oxbridge.
    :dito:

    Ours organised a really interesting day with Dr Peter Connolley based on the q "What is Truth?" but other than that has been a big waste of time... They ask you whether you've been stretched, then if you say no they do nothing about it!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Some schools aren't particularly bothered about their positions in the league tables so much as their reputations (ooh, it's just like TSR!). The better the reputation, the higher quality (generally) of the staff applying for jobs at the school. And even schools who don't care about results but want each student to do as well as he possibly can want to have good teachers.
    The students who most show their academic abilities also tend to be more highly-motivated than the lower-achievers, so don't need as much attention. Schools have very limited resources and in general feel that these resources more benefit the lower achieving students. Isn't the knowledge that you'll go to a better university, get a better degree, and probably a better job than the less academic students reward enough for you?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    no, but the lower school is streamed
    • CV Helper
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    CV Helper
    (Original post by smeets)
    At my school (in Scotland) we have a "very able pupils' policy" and a "very able pupils' club". Originally it was called "able pupils' club/policy" but this kicked up a big fuss as it suggested that those pupils who were not in the club were not "able".

    The club is accessible only by invitation, which are given out based on prelim scores and Cognitive Ability Tests. Once you're in you never have to re-qualify as it were. Basically what happens is the school, at the start of the year, expect all the departments to plan some kind of seminar/presentation designed to stimulate the very able pupils. Occasionally guest speakers are booked. Those pupils in the club are given a list of all the seminars planned for the year ahead and a brief description of what they entail. The pupils then indicate which of the seminars they wish to attend. Attendance is not mandatory.

    The main problem with the system we have is it does not take into consideration people who excel in only one or two subjects.
    Just noticed which school you were from - I was at MES a couple of years ago when they started the "able" pupils thing. Nice to see they've formalised it a little - we basically just went out of classes for an hour a week and b*tched about how restrictive the classes were, which teachers we didn't like, etc.!
    I think it's a good idea to have "extra" classes or whatever for more able pupils as it keeps them interested in school. I didn't find much of the curriculum at school very interesting and my parents encouragement was the main thing that kept me interested in learning (they encouraged me to do stuff outside of school).
    Oh, and in answer to Madelyn's question: yes, I do think they should have extra stuff organised for them. If they're bored in class because the work is too easy, that means the education system is failing them and if the only way this can be worked around is by providing extra stuff, then that's how I guess it should be. I think that the education system caters far too much to Joe Average - it's all very well making it suitable for the average students (obviously "most" people will then cope with it) but those who are more able than that need as much encouragement and additional support as those who are struggling to keep up, otherwise they will get frustrated and eventually give up.
    Jenn xx
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    The education system has to cater to Joe Average because its priority is to get the largest possible number of students educated to the greatest possible extent. Of course it's irritating and frustrating for the more able students, but not being allowed to fully stretch myself in class always made me more determined to do so outside school, and to continue my education to a level which I would find truly challenged me. And by separating students according to ability (my school starts to divide people into sets from year eight), the higher achievers can be stretched, all together. Moreover, as classes get smaller (GCSE groups are smaller than KS3, AS smaller than GCSE, A2 smaller than AS), each student has more attention focused on him, so is both forced and encouraged to work to the best of his abilities.
    As for extra classes and so on, first of all, that uses up resources which I think would be better spent on the students who most need it. Of course it would be nice, but the most able students will get stacks of good GCSEs without the extra help. Other students may not. Priorities.
    It also might lead to feelings of exclusion among 'borderline' students - those who just make it over the G&T barrier and are allowed into the extra classes might feel that they're trailing behind the others in that group, when they're used to being top of the class. Those who are judged not quite able enough might start feeling resentful against the peope in G&T. Moreover, how can you divide them sensibly? We disregarded the G&T list at my school because we knew it was ridiculous. Half the people on it didn't deserve to be, and plenty more who ought to have been on weren't. It's never been much of an issue for us because G&T didn't seem to mean very much, but if it were to actually allow students access to extra tuition or school trips or anything, it would be clearly unfair.
    • CV Helper
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    CV Helper
    (Original post by Madelyn)
    The education system has to cater to Joe Average because its priority is to get the largest possible number of students educated to the greatest possible extent. Of course it's irritating and frustrating for the more able students, but not being allowed to fully stretch myself in class always made me more determined to do so outside school, and to continue my education to a level which I would find truly challenged me. And by separating students according to ability (my school starts to divide people into sets from year eight), the higher achievers can be stretched, all together. Moreover, as classes get smaller (GCSE groups are smaller than KS3, AS smaller than GCSE, A2 smaller than AS), each student has more attention focused on him, so is both forced and encouraged to work to the best of his abilities.
    As for extra classes and so on, first of all, that uses up resources which I think would be better spent on the students who most need it. Of course it would be nice, but the most able students will get stacks of good GCSEs without the extra help. Other students may not. Priorities.
    It also might lead to feelings of exclusion among 'borderline' students - those who just make it over the G&T barrier and are allowed into the extra classes might feel that they're trailing behind the others in that group, when they're used to being top of the class. Those who are judged not quite able enough might start feeling resentful against the peope in G&T. Moreover, how can you divide them sensibly? We disregarded the G&T list at my school because we knew it was ridiculous. Half the people on it didn't deserve to be, and plenty more who ought to have been on weren't. It's never been much of an issue for us because G&T didn't seem to mean very much, but if it were to actually allow students access to extra tuition or school trips or anything, it would be clearly unfair.
    I realise that the education system *generally* has to cater to Joe Average but I don't think it should be so inflexible that it can't cope with those below and above this standard. It is widely adapted to suit those who are below the standard as schools do not want to be seen to be "failing" those pupils at the lower end of the spectrum, but those at the top are generally ignored as they are achieving well enough to keep the school happy. I agree with you that the resources should be spent on "the students who most need it" but I think here you're implying that "those who most need it" are the ones who are at the lower end, which I would debate. Obviously resources are required for students working below their potential, but this includes those who are forced to by the curriculum as well as those who are working below the "average" level. I think it's essential to keep the upper end of students challenged with their work and interested in learning. Of course, some of the more able students will be motivated enough to further their education outside of school and will seek out activites which challenge them, but this is not always the case and I feel that more resources should be allocated to helping *every* pupil achieve the best that they can. I was bored stiff for 2 years at school during my standard grades being taught stuff which I found neither particularly interesting nor challenging (as were several of my friends) and I would very much have appreciated someone spending the time and/or money to encourage us to work at the highest level we were capable of, not just the highest level the education system required of us at that stage.
    I agree that it is difficult to assess which pupils should be classed as "gifted & talented" and therefore the problem is not an easy one to solve. A pupil who is particularly gifted at, say, sport will have very different needs to one who is excellent at every academic subject for example. I can't suggest a fool-proof way to select "gifted & talented" pupils without extensive testing (which is obviously costly and probably of little actual benefit to the pupil), and even then this will not always work. However I would strongly dispute that it would be "unfair" to provide extra tuition to such pupils if they were fairly identified. I'm sure there are people at your school who have special educational needs (e.g. dyslexia) which are catered for through extra help, perhaps in the form of extra classes or maybe even a helper in the class in extreme cases...? I would suggest that "gifted" children be treated as having special educational needs as they too deserve additional support to achieve the best level they are capable of.
    Just my 2p!
    Jenn xx
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KAISER_MOLE)
    My school has a G&T coordinator, but I can not say an awful lot gets done, perhaps some bits lower down the school, but nothing is down out of the way to cater for the gifted and talented...when you say G&T are you referring to NAGTY or generally...(I am probably becoming a regional NAGTY student councillor for SW in September, not like i'll be up to much! :p: )
    hehe. i spent the last year or ish as a NAGTY NW Councillor.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Yes, yes yes - there was one scheme in particular I remember in which all the people had at least one level 7 in their sats were made to stand in telephone boxes and contact their inner gurus.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    We didn't have one at school, but at college there was a special group that were applying to Oxbridge, and they had meetings with teachers all the time and extra classes to prepare their personal statement...the rest of us who weren't applying to Oxbridge got sod all help with our personal statements and had to struggle with stuff on our own
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I think the term "gifted and talented" doesn't actually mean what it denotes, anyway. It's different in every school because different schools have different ranges of ability and the Government requires a quota of between 10-15% of students to be identified as most able. In my school, therefore, people who in my opinion should definitely never have been given that label (including myself actually) were put on the register.. I think you had to achieve 566 in your KS3 SATs or above, which in for instance a grammar school might be achieved by the lowest attaining pupils. It didn't make much difference anyway - we went on a trip in year 8 and had a special "interview" once a year to make sure we were on track for decent GCSEs, and that was it.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    i think that schools hav to cater for "average joes" because it is assumed that they are less immature and less motivated than "gifted and talented" students. if the schools concentrated too much on gifted pupils then it wud mean that the less able pupils wud fail miserably. whereas if they concentrate more on the less abled it means that the school will hav a higher pass rate(assuming that the gifted also pass).
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    rofl we have gifted and talented shenanigans and you get chosen for certain subjects, i got teh science, geography, english lit/lan and history ones, some people get like 9. Its a load of **** though nothing happens and you juss look like a nub.
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by El Chueco)
    hehe. i spent the last year or ish as a NAGTY NW Councillor.

    Oh aye, there seems to be a lot of people on the forums from the North East.

    18? Ahhh, you're going to get evicted >.<
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I'm gifted... Just thought I would share that with all you guys!
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    I don't know about you guys, but one of the main "issues" with the very able pupils programme at my school is that its very cloak and dagger. Quite a few people resent it cause of this - especially the people who think they should be in it.

    As for Oxbridge, the very able pupils only benefit from the school writing that they were a member of the very able pupil club on their reference. There is no special help given to them.
 
 
 

2,497

students online now

800,000+

Exam discussions

Find your exam discussion here

Poll
Should predicted grades be removed from the uni application process

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.