Will, Emma (SEN)
From:	Anthony Stevens [stevens@gil.com.au]
Sent:	Saturday, 24 February 2001 11:30 PM
To:	eet.sen@aph.gov.au
Subject:	Gifted and Talented Education
The Secretary
Senate Employment, Workplace Relations, Small Business and Education
References Committee
Suite S1.61 Parliament House
CANBERRA ACT 2600

My name is Sue Stevens and I am an experienced secondary science teacher
who is currently a full time mother at home. I would like to express my
views on some problems in the current status of gifted and talented
children in the education system.

The crux of the problem is the lack of understanding of the gifted
person and the fears and misconceptions that stem from this. Gifted
students have needs in education similar in intensity to those people
who are the same number of standard deviations below the norm as the
gifted are above the norm. These needs can be met for example, by
withdrawal, ability grouping, differentiated curriculum, etc.

As recently as the 1980's, intellectually impaired students were
considered too different to be accepted as part of society. Today,
parents of intellectually impaired students and indeed the students
themselves are no longer made to feel a burden nor unbearably different
and hold their place equally and with pride in many regular schools. I
am aware that this acceptance has been the result of a century of
lobbying and I applaud this positive outcome.

The same, however, needs to be done for the gifted so that they, too,
may feel ownership of our education system, which can cater for their
needs.

All individuals, including the gifted, need acceptance in society. The
life-enhancing talents of any individual should be acknowledged and
promoted by our educational institutions. Society has learnt to accept
the "sometimes limited" abilities of some individuals and is
incorporating them into the workforce to make them functioning members
of society and we have come to appreciate how these individuals enrich
the tapestry of humanity. It is now less of a stigma to be labelled
learning disabled. However, being gifted still carries stigma and fear
in some circumstances and is not to be talked about. Society needs to be
educated to accept the "g" word, acknowledge gifted individuals and as
for all other variations in the student population (e.g. the visually
impaired), provide special programs to enable these students to reach
their potential. This can therefore ensure a life of fulfilment and
achievement.

It has been shown statistically that some criminals are quite gifted and
yet, their intelligence has not been able to benefit themselves or
society. Subsequently, gifted students need to be recognised and sought
out early in their education and dealt with deftly before a predictable
laissez faire attitude and consequent under-achievement sets in. These
attitudes and results can manifest themselves in all sorts of
antisocial, and damaging behaviours which are, in themselves, costly
problems to deal with. Gifted students are then more difficult to
identify.

The main thrust of education should be learning how to learn, not just
learning. This sets the students up for a responsible, effective and
fulfilling time for the majority of their lives which comes into effect
after they have left school. Gifted students are neither learning nor
learning how to learn at school. They need the skills and they need the
exhilaration of meeting challenges that many students develop tackling
the regular curriculum. Intellectually impaired students may be at a
level where it is impossible to learn a good deal of the set curriculum,
but they, fortunately, have in place a tailored program which encourages
them to learn, teaches them how to learn at their level and how to
utilise their ability to its fullest potential.

The present provision for the gifted, including access to appropriate
educational delivery, social support structures and flexible progression
through the school years, is inadequate. Again, what is needed is
societal acknowledgment and acceptance of the gifted and more provision
for teacher training, both pre-service and in-service, to accommodate
the identification and teaching of the gifted student.

A separate teaching degree or a separate strand for the second half of
the teaching degree incorporating an honours year should be considered.
This would encourage more research on gifted education and ensure the
uptake of this research by the teaching profession. All teachers need
training on the identification of the gifted. As varying degrees of
gifted students exist in all schools it should be mandatory that all
current teachers are inserviced.

The establishment of the focus schools by Education Queensland is a
fantastic start in addressing the acknowledgment and needs of gifted
students and needs to be continued. The focus schools offer a two-day
inservive to teachers.

The University of New South Wales offers a post-graduate Certificate of
Gifted Education as well, so it seems that there is a minor groundswell
in the promotion of the need of gifted education in the nation. If all
teachers could be as solicitously supportive of the requirements of
their gifted students as they would be say, for a wheel-chaired student
in their school, they would have to modify and adapt certain routines of
these students.

The Commonwealth role in gifted education should be to co-ordinate a
national taskforce to create a policy and working program for gifted
education. It is appropriate for the Commonwealth to recognise this need
even if merely to be equitable (compare support for the Hearing
Impaired, Visually Impaired, Intellectually Impaired and the
Athletically Gifted). A student who has specific physical needs for
equity in education is assured that accomodations will be made in our
state schooling systems. One wonders how long it will be before gifted
students who have been identified with independent testing start
litigation in order to be assured of appropriate accomodations.

Sue Stevens
7 Sabot St
Jamboree Heights
QLD   4074
email : stevens@gil.com.au
phone : 07 3279 1157