So very angry right now!!

milliebear00001

Gingham_R wrote: »

Exactly. Which is another reason that a no hands up rule and other ways of getting children to talk about the answers works.

No hands up wouldn't work for children who need to shout out - it is designed to be used with a selection tool, so that children are targeted to answer or randomly selected - not to have a free for all discussion dominated by one or two kids - that's exactly what it's supposed to avoid.

Gingham_R

milliebear00001 wrote: »

This is pure cloud cuckoo land stuff. Training staff in the complex needs of gifted children (in all their guises) is very far from a quick half hour. Ni hands up is commonly used in classrooms now anyway. This is not what the research suggests is needed - which is that impulsive childrne would benefot from no hands up all of the time.

In most schools the top of the priority pile will be providing individualised learning for those children whose needs are such that they require a hugely different learning experience. Then we will do what we can to cater for as many different learning styles as possible within our own classrooms, but you cannot teach in all ways all of the time, so children must sometimes learn in ways that would not be their first choice.

You're not reading what I'm saying clearly enough. I said the no hands up stuff was a quick half hour. The issues around giftedness are much more complex and I didn't imply otherwise.

Of course children must sometimes learn in ways that would not be their first choice. I'd say that is likely to happen in almost all classrooms and even in home schooling.

What isn't acceptable is where children spend large chunks of the day NOT learning, which is the situation for many children with special needs, gifted or otherwise.

Gingham_R

milliebear00001 wrote: »

No hands up wouldn't work for children who need to shout out - it is designed to be used with a selection tool, so that children are targeted to answer or randomly selected - not to have a free for all discussion dominated by one or two kids - that's exactly what it's supposed to avoid.

What's designed to be used with a selection tool? No hands up is more wide ranging than that. If every child has a learning partner to tell their answer to, how is there a need to target children or randomly select for answer? If there is a choral response, how does that require selection for answer?

It's not just about pulling tongue depressors with names on out of a jar.

There's no need for a free for all discussion.

milliebear00001

Gingham_R wrote: »

Care and high consideration for social and emotional issues
Care and high consideration for special needs

These are the two core priorities I set out earlier. I'm guessing you didn't mean these when you said what I wanted in schools was at the bottom of the priority pile.

If these aren't at the top of the pile, we're getting something terribly, terribly wrong.

But those two are hugely varying. The extreme cases will be given time and resourcing. The rest will get a piecemeal approach when staffing and other resourcing allows.

For example, all the children with a severe special need will be funded and receive individualised attention. Those on the periphery will get extra attention when funds and timetabling allow for it. Meanwhile, we do what we can for those children in the classroom, knowing all the while that they need more help than we are able to provide.

I have a child in my class with adhd. He receives no extra funding but really requires one on one LSA support to help him stay focused and on task. Unfortunately, that is my job, alongside making sure the needs of the other 29 are met. I know several of the other parents are resentful of the time I spend with him, as they see it as at the expense of their own children. They may be right on occasion!

milliebear00001

Gingham_R wrote: »

What's designed to be used with a selection tool? No hands up is more wide ranging than that. If every child has a learning partner to tell their answer to, how is there a need to target children or randomly select for answer? If there is a choral response, how does that require selection for answer?

It's not just about pulling tongue depressors with names on out of a jar.

There's no need for a free for all discussion.

Those methods are different to 'no hands up' which is a specific learning tool. Believe it or not, we do have children who like learning using 'hands up', and we often do need to have 'whole class discussion'. Most classrooms will use (quite rightly) a whole combination of these, to meet the wide ranging needs of all the children in the class. I have children who really dislike no hands up, and others who abhor paired work, still more who groan when I give a team working task.

milliebear00001

Gingham_R wrote: »

You're not reading what I'm saying clearly enough. I said the no hands up stuff was a quick half hour. The issues around giftedness are much more complex and I didn't imply otherwise.

Of course children must sometimes learn in ways that would not be their first choice. I'd say that is likely to happen in almost all classrooms and even in home schooling.

What isn't acceptable is where children spend large chunks of the day NOT learning, which is the situation for many children with special needs, gifted or otherwise.

I don't think you'd find many teachers who disagreed with this. You'd find many who could explain to you why it sometimes happens though. All schools are not the same, and do not have the same issues to contend with.

Gingham_R

milliebear00001 wrote: »

But those two are hugely varying.

They certainly are and that's one of the reasons it needs to be top of the priority list. We need to know how to deal with these things as they come up.

With the little one with ADHD, his behaviour is impacting on the class which is probably one of the main reasons his ADHD was diagnosed. There may well be a little dreamer sitting next to him who isn't diagnosed but who has the same condition. (Perhaps the young lad needs to have his medication looked at?)

Re no hands up - we're talking about 2 different things. You're talking about a particular strategy that has that specific name. I'm talkign about using a range of strategies that don't involve putting their hands up - though obviously a range of strategies is needed in any classroom.

Gingham_R

milliebear00001 wrote: »

I don't think you'd find many teachers who disagreed with this. You'd find many who could explain to you why it sometimes happens though. All schools are not the same, and do not have the same issues to contend with.

Having spent time in scores of schools, from the most deprived to private schools, I'm well aware of that.

milliebear00001

Gingham_R wrote: »

They certainly are and that's one of the reasons it needs to be top of the priority list. We need to know how to deal with these things as they come up.

With the little one with ADHD, his behaviour is impacting on the class which is probably one of the main reasons his ADHD was diagnosed. There may well be a little dreamer sitting next to him who isn't diagnosed but who has the same condition. (Perhaps the young lad needs to have his medication looked at?)

Re no hands up - we're talking about 2 different things. You're talking about a particular strategy that has that specific name. I'm talkign about using a range of strategies that don't involve putting their hands up - though obviously a range of strategies is needed in any classroom.

His behaviour isn't an issue at all. He needs lots of personal help to stay on task - he is the 'dreamer' you describe. He isn't medicated - parental choice. Parents are resentful because they would all like their child to have the extra attention he gets.

We use lots of teaching strategies that don't involve putting up hands - that really isn't rocket science.

Jojo_the_Tightfisted

Gingham_R wrote: »

Exactly. Which is another reason that a no hands up rule and other ways of getting children to talk about the answers works.

And would end up with other gifted kids becoming completely disenchanted with the whole learning process and looking for alternative ways to entertain themselves.

Like drawing cartoons at the back on the reasoning that nobody's interested in what they have to say now. Or working out ways to bother the teacher so they feel like somebody has noticed this stuff is soooooo boringly easy for once.

After all, from the point of view of a kid whose mind works at near lightspeed, what is the use of telling the kid next to them if they have difficulty in reading without using their index finger to follow the words? If nothing else, it would make the other kid feel bad about not knowing the answer or encourage them to rely on the gifted kid to do everything. Especially if the G&T kid has parents who insist that nobody likes a smartarze (because they don't have a clue how to deal with them either).

Not all G&T kids are the same. If you had been my teacher, I would have worked out some way to entertain myself/torture you for making me sit down and be quiet rather than bother you with questions and comments/sit with the psychokid who hates me for making them feel bad for knowing the answer to everything. Being effectively told that nobody is interested in my answer - which not letting me speak out in class would have done - would have created more of a monster than having an IQ in the stratosphere already had. Especially as I would far rather have been in music or art lessons every step of the way.

Would have also been unfair for the kid next to me in other ways, as I would have switched off and jumped to another subject or five in my head whilst they were still listening to what they were supposed to be doing. Or getting the warpspeed babble about the subjects, starting with the original point, but then going off on one so far that the confused look changes into the familiar complete blankness of the headscrewed victim of a G&T onslaught.


i would have pitied any kid made to sit and listen to me. The staff were fair game, though.