Agenda item

Gifted and Talented Education

Meeting of Children, Families & Education - Learning and Development Policy Overview and Scrutiny Committee, Thursday, 5th November, 2009 10.00 am (Item 14.)

Minutes:

(Report by Roger Silk, Gifted and Talented Adviser, Advisory Service Kent ASK)

(1) Members of the Committee received a report that highlighted both the national and regional initiatives for gifted and talented young people, in particular a nationally funded pilot for Gifted and Talented pupils of which 5 Nationally Challenged schools in Kent were taking part. The specific aim of the pilot was to support students from disadvantage backgrounds during Key Stage 4 who would have fallen into the Gifted and Talented criteria if it were not for the circumstances that they face.

(2) Members were given the opportunity to make comments and ask questions which included the following:

(3) In answer to the questions on the ethos behind Gifted and Talented education Mr Silk agreed to forward a summary to Members of the Committee as there was already a large bundle of published literature on the topic.

(4) In response to a question by Mr Vye, Mr Silk advised that Gifted was based on academic ability and Talented was ability in art, sport, music, drama etc. Mr Silk said that there was a grey area, at the age of 14 years, with the development of diplomas more high academic element. Within the annual census this information went into the same box, this meant a school may achieve 100% with their academic level but it could be only 70%, 30% may be the talented. Each school identifies its top 10%, by schools identifying there own cohort. The schools knew which pupils had succeeded and who had improved and who would do well. Mr Silk said that it was his role to encourage schools to look at all areas of subjects. He advised that specialist schools were also reaching out in terms of outreach and working with Primary Schools. The links with higher education were supported through the links of the Regional Partnership. There was tremendous support through higher education institutions for Summer schools.

(5) The Chairman suggested there was a definite link with extended schools.

(6) Mr Burgess suggested to the Committee that all Members should check that their schools had the G&T programme and at least one governor was responsible for this. He advised that there was bespoke training for this role.

(7) In response to questions raised by Mr Burgess, Mr Silk advised that the Gifted and Talented criterion on page 5 was provided by the Department of Children, Schools and Families (DCFS). Chatham House was a different Scheme and was a high achieving school. The school applied for the scheme under their redesignation. Mr Silk advised that the figure of 10% was a guideline, he advised schools to be flexible about this percentage. He explained that school Information was transferred with the child and with the transfer arrangement the child’s ability was stressed, but their new school may have a higher bar for their 10%, however this did not mean that the child’s ability changed, but it may mean the child would not be in the Gifted and Talented programme for that new school.

(8) In response to a question on Higher Education and University places at Oxford in particular for Gifted and Talented young people, Mr Silk advised that this was not an area of his expertise but added that he felt there was a need for effective links with Further Education and help for young people with interviews.

(9) In response to questions by Mr Cubitt, Mr Silk advised that a negative part of the Gifted and Talented programme was that young teachers do the course and then move on. The Rising Tide Lifts All Ships Initiative challenges all children so that they all raise their standard. It was a matter of changing where teachers were looking to challenge.

(10) Mr Silk explained that the monitoring of the Gifted and Talented programme was carried out in the individual schools by the Gifted and Talented Coordinator. They would identify for example 19 children with expertise and then they would be tracked using a data information spread sheet. In the new OFSTED Framework there was significant group looked at the Gifted and Talented. Colleagues are looking at this as a challenge. Mrs Whittle added that there needed to be good collaboration between Primary and Secondary schools. Every child had to be looked at as individuals and their progress tracked not just the Gifted and Talented pupils.

(11) In reply to a question by Mr Ozog, Mr Silk clarified that the Gifted and Talented Programme identified children with hidden disadvantages. He gave the example of a Looked after child, Yugoslavian, placed in Kent that spoke Yugoslavian and Italian in year 10, the barriers were obvious but his aptitude to do well shone through and additional support was put in place, 18 months later he achieved the 2^nd highest GCSE results in the school.