![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Apr. 1st, 2008 12:11 pmIntersting article today about selective schooling- Tovey makes the point that while parents and teachers complain about selective schooling drawing away the best and brightest from the local high schools, for many a gifted child selective schools provide opportunities to learn at a decent pace, and an escape from intelligence-centred bullying.
She notes the downsides, particularly that a bright child surrounded by the brilliant can end up underestimating their own abilities. I'm quite sure I wouldn't've enjoyed selective high school, had not messed up and handed my application in late, for just that reason (though it might've brought me down a few worthwhile pegs).
She points out that regular schools just don't cater to gifted and talented students, which is true. But then she throws in this line:
That's exactly the kind of thinking which results in a lack of resources for G&T kids. Perhaps SOME kids will do well no matter what. It looks like I'm one of them, little studying maniac for most of my life, but I've had the most fabulous teachers and mentors encouraging me since year six.
Some of those high achievers, though, will end up strung out, bullied, and depressed, convinced they're the only freak in the universe. Others with potential, like my father, will drop out of school, bored and with neither family or school offering them any challenges or reasons to stay. Others, like my uncle, will realise they can pass comfortably without any effort, and then find themselves unequipped to cope with the real study required at university.
Few gifted children will achieve great things unless someone challenges them to do so... As long as the schooling system is content for them to achieve *good* things, we're consigning ourselves to a mediocrity. Yes, students who are struggling to keep their heads above water should be given every resource to achieve their very best. Why should the intelligent be denied the same advantage?
She notes the downsides, particularly that a bright child surrounded by the brilliant can end up underestimating their own abilities. I'm quite sure I wouldn't've enjoyed selective high school, had not messed up and handed my application in late, for just that reason (though it might've brought me down a few worthwhile pegs).
She points out that regular schools just don't cater to gifted and talented students, which is true. But then she throws in this line:
Gifted children will probably achieve great things, no matter what school they go to, and it's imperative that students who are struggling to keep their heads above water are given the most attention in public debate.
That's exactly the kind of thinking which results in a lack of resources for G&T kids. Perhaps SOME kids will do well no matter what. It looks like I'm one of them, little studying maniac for most of my life, but I've had the most fabulous teachers and mentors encouraging me since year six.
Some of those high achievers, though, will end up strung out, bullied, and depressed, convinced they're the only freak in the universe. Others with potential, like my father, will drop out of school, bored and with neither family or school offering them any challenges or reasons to stay. Others, like my uncle, will realise they can pass comfortably without any effort, and then find themselves unequipped to cope with the real study required at university.
Few gifted children will achieve great things unless someone challenges them to do so... As long as the schooling system is content for them to achieve *good* things, we're consigning ourselves to a mediocrity. Yes, students who are struggling to keep their heads above water should be given every resource to achieve their very best. Why should the intelligent be denied the same advantage?