While the education policy landscape changes, those who work in schools will agree on one constant. All young people – regardless of their background, context, attainment levels or any other labels they may acquire – can benefit from and deserve to have their specific needs catered for. This is no less the case for the more able than for any other group. We must ensure that these learners experience high-quality challenge and support to develop their abilities.
As Sir Michael Wilshaw stated in 2016, “if provision for the brightest children is good, it is likely that other groups of learners are also being well served.”
Education is concerned with enhancing learning. Our evidence base is evolving, as we learn from one another, from other countries and increasingly from other disciplines. In this “Perspectives on More Able” series, NACE aims to shine a spotlight on effective policy and practice for the more able, providing a forum for views, opinions and debate.
NACE CEO Rob Lightfoot shares the thinking behind NACE’s refreshed vision and mission statements.
Having worked in state secondary comprehensive schools for nearly 30 years, prior to joining NACE as CEO in 2021, I have worked through and been involved with various strategies throughout my teaching career. It is safe to say some strategies were more successful than others!
In recent years, however, a focus on cognitive challenge had an extremely positive impact on my students. I don’t think any of us will argue that a teacher’s job is to ensure all of their learners are challenged and working to the very best of their ability. This is extremely difficult to achieve unless we start our planning by focusing on the needs of the ‘more able’ learners in any particular class. They have their own distinct needs, like any other group of learners, and – as we can see from our NACE Challenge Award schools – you will see a rise in achievement for a much wider group of learners if the needs of the ‘more able’ are met effectively across a school.
NACE uses the term ‘cognitive challenge’ (sometimes shortened to ‘challenge’) to describe how learners become able to understand and form complex and abstract ideas and develop the ability to solve problems. Cognitive challenge will prompt and stimulate extended and strategic thinking, analytical and evaluative processes.
Opportunities for cognitive challenge are essential. As summarised by Professor Philip Adey (2008): “What the research shows consistently is that if you face children with intellectual challenges and then help them talk through the problems towards a solution, then you almost literally stretch their minds. They become cleverer, not only in the particular topic, but across the curriculum. It can therefore be argued that teachers cannot afford to allow their pupils to miss out on the opportunities for deep thinking.”
You can read more about our work on cognitive challenge here.
I look back with some embarrassment at my early teaching career when the focus was on the ‘middle’ and challenge was provided through the setting of additional tasks once the planned work had been completed. These tasks were often more of the same, rather than expecting learners to think hard and develop the skills they need to be successful in the future, both in school and beyond. When enrichment tasks did contain necessary levels of challenge, learners who encountered various forms of disadvantage could be hampered by lack of access to the same support/opportunities as their peers, which created barriers to learning. This is the focus for our current research.
The terminology associated with ‘more able’ learners can be both confusing and controversial. I have encountered many occasions when teaching colleagues come to me with a preconceived view of what NACE stands for as a charity. Many conversations start with us being accused of elitism – championing a group who are already at an advantage – but this couldn’t be further from the truth.
Whether we refer to learners as more or most able, exceptionally able, gifted and/or talented, or as having higher learning potential, we need to recognise their needs and ‘teach to the top’. A ‘teaching to the top’ approach ensures we meet the needs of our highest-achieving learners (and those with the potential to achieve highly), but this does not affect our ability to break down the objectives to meet the needs of all learners too. As noted above, all learners will benefit from a challenge-focused approach.
We want to support schools to utilise every second of every lesson to ensure that all young people have the opportunity to develop their abilities without limits. This is at the heart of our refreshed vision and mission statements, which you can read below and on our “About” webpage.
Our vision
That all young people, including the more able, have the opportunity to develop their abilities without limits – no matter what barriers to learning they may face and no matter what school they attend.
Our mission
To support and work with schools in England, Wales and internationally to enable teachers and senior leaders to understand the needs of their more able learners and to develop high-quality provision and learning cultures which raise expectations and standards for all.
To develop and disseminate evidence-based approaches to provision for more able learners and to undertake and spearhead research into effective practices for such learners.
To champion more able learners, including those experiencing disadvantage, and to lobby for their inclusion in school improvement strategies, national education policy and other developments to achieve greater equity in education for all learners.
Our goals
To support teachers and school leaders in developing high-quality teaching and curriculum design for more able learners and challenge for all through a range of professional development programmes and resources.
To support schools in self-evaluation and school improvement for more able learners in a culture of challenge for all through the NACE Challenge Development Programme.
To provide a highly regarded quality mark for school provision for more able learners through the NACE Challenge Award and to support accredited schools in disseminating best practice.
To provide networking opportunities for schools to drive improvements for more able learners through knowledge sharing and collaboration.
To undertake research into highly effective provision for more able learners and to disseminate this through publications, partnerships and NACE professional development services.
To communicate with relevant national bodies and to contribute to policy developments to ensure the inclusion of more able young people, including those experiencing disadvantage, in improving educational outcomes and life chances for all.
To engage in partnerships which will raise and promote awareness of the needs of more able learners, and how to meet their needs effectively through strategies which will have a positive impact on the aspirations and achievements of a wider group of learners.
If you would like to know more about what NACE has to offer you and your school, then please do not hesitate to contact us:
NACE is collaborating with York St John University on research and resources to help schools support more able learners with higher levels of perfectionism. In this blog post, the university’s Marianne E. Etherson, Michael C. Grugan, Luke F. Olsson, and Professor Andrew P. Hill present the findings of a review of research examining perfectionism in more able learners and highlight how distinct dimensions of perfectionism influence learning outcomes in the classroom.
Perfectionism can both enhance and hinder the educational experiences of learners. While perfectionism reflects an extreme requirement for perfection and might motivate learners to work hard and strive for success, perfectionism can also hinder healthy adjustment in learning environments. Learners who are perfectionistic, for instance, often report greater negative reactions to mistakes and tend to respond more adversely to failure.
The extent to which perfectionism impedes performance and wellbeing will depend on which of the two main dimensions of perfectionism are most prominent in the student. The two main dimensions of perfectionism are perfectionistic strivings and perfectionistic concerns:
Perfectionistic strivings capture the extent to which individuals set and strive for unrealistically high personal standards.
By contrast, perfectionistic concerns capture the extent to which individuals are excessively concerned about mistakes, fear negative evaluation, and worry that their performance is never good enough.
These two dimensions can be exhibited to different degrees in students, with some being higher in both and others exhibiting one more than the other. Research suggests that perfectionistic concerns is most problematic dimension in the classroom and generally has the biggest influence on learners.
In order to gain a better understanding of the influence of perfectionism in more able learners, we worked with NACE to conduct a comprehensive review of research in this area. Using a thorough and systematic search, we found 36 studies, published over the last 24 years, that included over 10,000 able learners. The research was drawn from across the world, but predominantly from the USA and China. Studies included in the review typically utilised questionnaires to measure perfectionism and a range of different outcomes such as academic performance, problem-solving, creativity, self-esteem, motivation, wellbeing, happiness, depression and life satisfaction.
In terms of the findings of the studies, we found perfectionistic concerns to be related to greater depression, neuroticism, and alienation from parents, as well as lower motivation, self-esteem, and creativity in the classroom.
By contrast, perfectionistic strivings exhibited both positive and negative qualities. Perfectionistic strivings, for instance, were related to better academic performance and life satisfaction but were also related to lower happiness and creativity.
Some studies examined combinations of perfectionistic concerns and perfectionistic strivings. These studies found groups exhibiting higher levels of perfectionistic concerns contributed to more debilitating emotional and wellbeing outcomes, such as lower happiness and self-esteem, and greater adjustment issues.
Our review, which will be published in Educational Psychology Review, is a touchstone for researchers, practitioners, and policy makers who want to better understand the consequences of perfectionism in more able learners. Likewise, our review provides an important foundation for interventions and curriculum-based programmes aimed at reducing perfectionism in able learners.
In line with our findings, those working with more able learners need to be mindful of the consequences of perfectionism and seek to reduce both perfectionistic strivings and perfectionistic concerns, but especially perfectionistic concerns.
To do so, teachers can play an instrumental role in creating environments that are less perfectionistic and focus on creativity, problem-solving and appropriate levels of challenge. Likewise, teachers can help more able students reframe setbacks as a normal part of the learning process and opportunities for growth and development, being mindful that more able learners often find setbacks more stressful.
The idea that things need to be done perfectly also needs to be challenged and discussed. Learners will need to be helped to recognise perfectionistic ways of responding to mistakes such as self-criticism and practice replacing them with more positive responses such as self-compassion and kindness.
Finally, schools will need to ensure that they have appropriate policies and referral mechanisms to provide support for more able learners who develop some of the extreme consequences of perfectionism such as burnout and depressive symptoms. While perfectionism may not lead to these types of outcomes for all learners, it is a possibility that teachers will need to be prepared for and be able to help recognise early signs.
York St John University and NACE are collaborating on research and resources to help schools support learners with high levels of perfectionism. Resources are currently being trialled with NACE member and R&D Hub Haybridge High School, and will be made more widely available in the coming year.
References:
Flett, G. L. & Hewitt, P. L. (2014). A proposed framework for preventing perfectionism and promoting resilience and mental health among vulnerable children and adolescents. Psychology in the Schools, 51, 899-912.
Grugan, M. C., Hill, A. P., Madigan, D. J., Donachie, T. C., Olsson, L. F., & Etherson, M. E. (Accepted). Educational Psychology Review.
Madigan, D. J. (2019). A meta-analysis of perfectionism and academic achievement. Educational Psychology Review, 31, 967-989.
Osenk, I., Williamson, P., & Wade, T. D. (2020). Does perfectionism or pursuit of excellence contribute to successful learning? A meta-analytic review. Psychological Assessment, 32, 972-983.
Speirs Neumeister, K. L., Williams, K. K., & Cross, T. L. (2009). Gifted high school students’ perspectives on the development of perfectionism. Roeper Review, 31, 198-206.
Stricker, J., Buecker, S., Schneider, M., & Preckel, F. (2020). Intellectual giftedness and multidimensional perfectionism: A meta-analytic review. Educational Psychology Review, 32, 391-414.
Book title: Boys Don’t Try? Rethinking Masculinity in Schools (2019)
Authors: Matt Pinkett and Mark Roberts
Reviewed by: Neil Jones, Lead Practitioner for Most Able Students, Impington Village College, Cambridgeshire
Synopsis:
The book aims to draw teachers and school leaders into subtler thinking about how and why boys, as a group, can fail at school. It also provides tips on how to improve the situation, pastorally and academically. There are different ways of being a boy, just as there are different ways of being a girl, when learning to manage one’s experience as a learner. Indeed, the authors argue that gender is a less important lens through which to view underachievement than are class perception, views of what constitutes mental health, curriculum and pedagogy. The book urges all teachers and school leaders to focus on making meaningful achievement possible for all students; and to avoid ‘what’s not wanted’: essentialist, low expectations of any group.
Why should NACE members read/be aware of this book?
Members should read this book as the dominant theme running throughout its 10 chapters is the need for challenge for all students. The authors take the firm view that cultures of underachievement are not transformed by ghettoing more able and talented learners away from the others. Challenge needs to run through every aspect of a school community. The authors argue from first principles and give examples to demonstrate that a culture of challenge and excitement works by infection. Divide-and-rule on the basis of baseline ability, on the other hand, reinforces failure in lower-achieving groups, and it is boys as a group who tend more to be negatively categorised, and who end up fulfilling teachers’ and leaders’ prophecies of failure.
What’s new?
Rhetorically, the authors carefully unpack how their views on ‘the boy problem’ have changed. With humility, but not the masochism that sometimes goes with teachers’ blogs, they trace the changes that experience has required of their thinking and practice. What is new for teachers thinking about more able and talented provision is the urgency with which we are persuaded to be gender-blind in our judgements, which should make our assessments of need and ability more responsive.
Key takeaways:
There are no specific techniques for teaching boys well.
Teachers’ high expectations of themselves and their students, in subject knowledge and behaviour for learning, trump gender considerations (such as single-sex classes, or male students being taught by male teachers) every time.
Setting by ability is more counterproductive than productive. The implication is that it should be avoided wherever possible. (For more on this, see NACE Trustee Liz Allen CBE’s review of Reassessing ‘Ability’ Grouping: Improving Practice for Equity and Attainment.)
Pastoral care should acknowledge that some boys swallow cultural stereotypes of masculinity, and schools should challenge these.
We need to change the negative labelling of ‘masculinity’. The phrase ‘toxic masculinity’ is counterproductive and highly charged. Instead, the authors advocate language such as ‘tender’ and ‘non-tender’ masculinity. Tenderness carries with it connotations of sincerity, vulnerability, openness and strength. Too often, anti-social behaviour is described away as being ‘toxically masculine’, whereas it is simply anti-social.
Final thoughts:
Written in 2019, the polemic of the book is of interest in the context of the culture wars in North Atlantic cultures following the financial crash of 2007/8. Gender is a point of contention in wider polarisations in identity politics, between, at the extremes, a pessimistic and anxious liberalism and a boorish and know-nothing authoritarianism. These authors know their purpose and appear to hold both sides of this shrill argument in equal contempt. Their focus is on getting the best out of all young people in schools.
At times, this is a flaw. I would have welcomed the authors’ views on how the British educational establishment has viewed this issue, and how this might overlap or differ in other countries. This is a pretty a-historical account, and there is much written elsewhere on the issue of boys in education, from at least Socrates on! But, taking the book on its own terms, as being the fruit of two excellent teachers’ research and day-in, day-out practice in schools, this is an invigorating call to break out of gender stereotyping and fight hard for every learner to go as far and fast as they can.
Before you buy… For discounts of up to 30% from a range of education publishers, view the list of current NACE member offers (login required).
Share your own review… Have you read a good book lately with relevance to provision for more able learners? Share it with the NACE community by submitting a review.
Book title: Reassessing ‘Ability’ Grouping: Improving Practice for Equity and Attainment Authors: Becky Francis, Becky Taylor, Antonina Tereshchenko Reviewed by: Liz Allen CBE, NACE Trustee
Synopsis:
Combining the outcomes of a large-scale research project with a thorough literature review and international practice, this book is a must read for all engaged in education policy and practice.
It considers how “ability grouping” is more accurately defined as attainment grouping, with the consequent limiting impact on classroom practice and on pupils’ chances of achievement. Compelling evidence is presented to show that misallocations reinforce “gendered, classed and racialised patterns of inequality”, especially when schools attempt to use more criteria than evidence of prior attainment.
The challenges of setting are explored, as are the opportunities of mixed ability grouping – a practice that calls out for deeper research. The impact of grouping practices on young people’s attainment and on their perceptions of themselves as learners is evidenced in depth.
The concluding reflections and recommendations are food for thought for primary and secondary school leaders, subject leads and practitioners.
Why should NACE members read/be aware of this book?
The research tests the contention that setting by ability improves outcomes for the more able.
The small, short-term benefits for “top set” pupils come at a high price. Six factors – including misallocations, lack of flexibility between sets, setting by groups of subjects and inequality of teaching – result in a “self-fulfilling prophecy” of underperformance, loss of self-confidence and social exclusion. There are issues for “top set pupils” – a fixed ability mindset; a sense of superiority, entitlement, disdain; or a sense of guilt, ambivalence, discomfort. The research draws the conclusion that “comprehensive” schools are fostering social division by attainment grouping.
The research findings require consideration by all practitioners who are committed to providing all young people with the best grouping in which their abilities can flourish.
What’s new?
Research into the impact of mixed attainment grouping is welcome. The practice is misunderstood and underused; this book explores the reasons why and looks in depth at the high-attaining schools who are committed to mixed ability grouping.
Each type of setting is analysed and its impact on equality of learning opportunities and achievement is presented. Insights into the best setting and all-ability practice provide schools with excellent starting points for in-house research-informed professional conversations.
Key takeaways and next steps for schools:
Give mixed ability advocates the opportunity to demonstrate that it is an equitable alternative, even for maths.
Take warning that inflexible attainment grouping can “widen the gap”. The evidence suggests this is pronounced in primary schools’ in-class grouping, especially when the naming of groups is hierarchical (e.g. from moped to Ferrari).
The literature review, record of methodology and suggestions for next steps provide schools with a robust approach for in-house research.
Setting needs to have high integrity and is most equitable when it is by subject.
Chapter 9’s “dos and don’ts” are essential reading for research-led schools.
Additional reading:
The book builds on Carol Dweck’s work, providing invaluable evidence on how grouping practices impact on mindset.
As the book draws attention to the consequences of misallocation, Making Data Work (Becky Allen, November 2018) is a helpful report for schools to consider when they revise their grouping strategy.
Inappropriate pedagogical practice and non-specialist teaching are identified as key factors in widening the gap. What Works? (Lee Elliot Major and Steve Higgins, Bloomsbury 2019) offers evidence of what works in primary and secondary schools to transform pupils’ progress.
Before you buy… For discounts of up to 30% from a range of education publishers, view the list of current NACE member offers (login required).
Share your own review… Have you read a good book lately with relevance to provision for more able learners? Share it with the NACE community by submitting a review.
Book title: Rosenshine’s Principles in Action Author: Tom Sherrington (2019) Reviewed by: Hilary Lowe, NACE Education Adviser
Synopsis:
Barack Rosenshine's Principles of Instruction are widely recognised for their clarity and simplicity and their potential to support teachers to engage with cognitive science and education research. In this book, Tom Sherrington takes Rosenshine's original 10 Principles of Instruction and condenses them in a succinct and very readable digest into four strands – sequencing concepts and modelling; questioning; reviewing material; and stages of practice – accompanied by guidance on how to use them to develop classroom practice at all key stages.
Why should NACE members read/be aware of this book?
In the context of learning for the more able, the four strands can be adapted to encompass the depth, breath and pace needed to challenge this group.
What’s new?
While the 10 Principles already bridge research and classroom practice, this book makes them even more accessible to teachers through Sherrington’s synthesis of the Principles into major synoptic strands, together with underpinning guidance on how to use them.
Key takeaways and next steps for schools:
Take time to understand the underlying model for Rosenshine’s Principles.
Consider to what extent each of the four strands already forms part of the school’s main teaching repertoire for all, and for more able learners, and the gaps.
Reflect on what is distinctive for more able learners.
Try out and review in several curriculum areas to illustrate the application of the principles, and share with other colleagues.
In summary:
This book fits well with much of the evidence-based pedagogic repertoire many schools are developing and merits strong consideration for further exploration in practices for more able learners.
Before you buy… For discounts of up to 30% from a range of education publishers, view the list of current NACE member offers (login required).
Share your own review… Have you read a good book lately with relevance to provision for more able learners? Share it with the NACE community by submitting a review.
NACE member Professor Valsa Koshy founded the Talent Development Programmes at Brunel University in 1996. Based on the findings of her research and intervention programmes, she shares seven key takeaways for schools to share with parents and carers to help their children succeed.
Recently, Brunel University released a news item and video outlining seven steps parents and carers can take to help their children succeed.
The importance of parental engagement in shaping children’s education and future has played a central role in the intervention programmes carried out at Brunel University. The team has worked closely with Professor Charles Desforges, whose seminal 2003 research report looked at parental involvement in the development of children. The report demonstrated that parental engagement has the greatest impact during the early years of schooling and that the benefit of parental involvement among primary school children is greater than the quality of an individual school, irrespective of social class and ethnic groups.
Yet my conversations with headteachers highlighted that in some schools parental engagement activities have been reduced due to competing priorities and increased workload. Our present intervention project provided some useful insights which we wanted to share with parents, through schools.
The research: who, what, how and why
The seven vital steps highlighted in the video are based on data gathered from 1,400 parents of younger children (5 to 11 years). Data was collected using focus group discussions and individual interviews with parents.
Participants came from all backgrounds, with 154 forming a representative sample of parents, which included parents of children in low-income families who receive pupil premium (PP) funding, as well as parents in highly successful professions and with high salaries. The project included families of four living in single rooms and children who are provided with a mid-morning snack by their schools as they come to school hungry and fall asleep in lessons.
The project was based on our shared beliefs that all children deserve a happy childhood full of joy, optimism and good physical health; and that children thrive best in environments which acknowledge their special strengths, help them in mastering challenges and in sharing their interests, curiosity, creativity, critical thinking skills and depth of understanding.
Participating parents were allocated targeted readings and activities they could do with their children, based on the book I co-authored with medical doctor Elizabeth Koshy: Find and Nurture Your Child's Gifts: Boost your Child's Learning Potential and Wellbeing (4-11 years). The book provides authoritative literature on talent development, good health and practical activities, plus over 30 case studies of children whose lives were transformed as a result of parental support.
Our research showed how supportive, effective parental education can:
Improve children’s self-esteem, attitudes to learning and achievement;
Enhance children’s wellbeing, especially mental health, and reduce anxiety;
Help children to reflect on their strengths, talents, passions and future careers.
One major element was the team’s realisation of how education and wellbeing are strongly interlinked. Based on all the information gathered, we identified seven areas which parents told us they found most useful to help their children succeed. These are included in the video, with examples.
Seven key takeaways for parents:
1. Intelligence is not fixed and we can change a child’s learning potential
Parents need to know and understand aspects of intelligence. Research evidence from neuroscience tells us a person’s intelligence is not fixed at birth and that it can increase and ability can change. Brain plasticity is the capacity of the brain to change; the human brain maintains an amazing plasticity throughout life.
Greater understanding of aspects of intelligence helped parents to abandon deterministic views about educational stereotypes. Sharing the information that they can become better learners, in every case, helped children to put in more effort and lifted them out of the feeling of hopelessness.
Eight-year-old Liam’s mother told us: “My son was rounded up in the playground and teased and called a ‘dunce’ because he was in the bottom group (lowest set) for maths. When I told him that people can actually become cleverer by putting in more effort instead of giving up, his eyes lit up. He started working hard. I also told him if he talked about his ideas his brain will make more connections. He took this literally and I found him talking to our cat about different shapes and their properties. He told me he is getting more ticks and his teacher has told him he will be moved up a group soon. He said to me that it means ‘I don’t always have to be in the bottom group.’”
2. There is no universally accepted definition of any of these terms: giftedness, talent, high ability
The terms “gifted”, “talent” and “high ability” are widely used but we do not have a shared definition. Often “gifted” is used to describe someone who shows outstanding talent in one or two areas, not necessarily in academic domains. Parents who participated in our project found Harvard University Professor Gardner’s theory, that intelligence is multi-dimensional and is displayed in different fields, most helpful. Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences helps to identify a full range of abilities and talents that people possess. Not just an intellectual capacity, but other intelligences – including musical, interpersonal, spatial-visual and linguistic intelligences. Although this theory has been around for many years, only three of the parents had heard of it.
Eight-year old Elena’s mother said: “Elena tells us that she has found her ‘special intelligence’ and it is spatial intelligence [visual-spatial – thinking in terms of physical space, as do architects and sailors]. Elena is autistic, likes to draw cathedrals and is brilliant at doing jigsaw puzzles.” Although not all Gardner’s intelligences are tested in school, Elena became more motivated, has higher self-esteem and has improved in her academic results.
3. Find and develop your child’s passion
Most children we worked with enjoyed undertaking personal passion projects. This idea of introducing passion projects appealed to all parents. Some children changed their passion and others stuck to them. The project team was told by parents that this is the biggest single thing they would cite as making their children happier and more fulfilled. It reduces anxiety and is an excellent way to spot your children’s special talents.
Nine-year old Lexi, who was suffering from intense anxiety about tests in school and was about to be referred to a psychologist, started her passion project on reading; she developed higher self-esteem, pride in her work and no longer needed treatment for anxiety.
4. Develop your children’s wellbeing
Through the project activities, parents recognised the vital importance of addressing their children’s wellbeing. There is very strong evidence that many young children lack self-esteem, are being subjected to bullying and suffer high levels of anxiety, which can all lead to depression and self-harm.
5. Children’s abilities do not depend on their parents' social backgrounds
The message and examples which showed that children’s abilities do not depend on their parents’ social backgrounds were well received and changed both parents’ and children’s attitudes and aspirations. An example is included in the video.
6. Spend quality time with your children
This was considered one of the most important messages by parents. Many parents told us they were too busy and did not have enough time to spend with their children. They were told that talking to children, asking good questions and wondering about things together encourage the learning process by making more connections in the brain. Examples are included in the video.
7. Fight low expectations in children with special needs
Children with special needs can do extremely well at school with parental support. The video features the example of Donna, a grandmother, who told me about her grandson, Zak, who has severe visual impairment in one eye. Zak was recently accepted into one of the most prestigious schools in the UK after taking a competitive entrance examination.
Final thoughts
Was it all joy and optimism throughout the project? What keeps me awake at night? One haunting image is that of a nine-year-old asking me for my phone number when I was working with him, saying: “I would like to phone you when I have cracked the maths problem. I like solving maths problems and it stops me feel hunger, because mum has not got enough money to buy food.”
Posted By NACE,
31 May 2019
Updated: 12 August 2021
Often school leaders and practitioners can feel on the back foot when explaining their focus on improving provision for the most able. Next time someone asks, be ready with a clear and confident response…
Whether openly posed or – as is often the case – an unspoken doubt, this question underlies the formation of NACE 40 years ago and our continued efforts to campaign on behalf of this group, alongside our members and partners.
For many in education, this question has become a fragmented one. There is a temptation to avoid tackling it head-on – focusing (with good reason) on disadvantage and social mobility, the wider benefits of raising levels of challenge and aspirations for all learners, or the impact on whole-school improvement. These are all valid and important issues, but they also sidestep the primary thrust of the question.
The direct answer is simple. All young people – regardless of their background, context, attainment levels or any other labels they may acquire – can benefit from and deserve to have their specific needs catered for. This is no less the case for the more able than for any other group. We must ensure that these learners experience high-quality challenge and support to develop their abilities.
A variety of myths and misconceptions, combined with a focus on raising average or lower levels of attainment, have contributed to more able learners slipping off the national agenda in England, Wales and elsewhere. These misconceptions include the assumptions that more able learners will excel regardless, that they will thrive in any environment, that all young people are potentially of high ability and therefore there is no specific group in need of additional support, or that able learners only exist in certain schools.
Not an elite agenda – in fact, the reverse is true
One of the most damaging misconceptions is the belief that focusing on the more able is elitist. In fact, far from being an elite agenda, focusing on provision for the more able is about ensuring equal opportunity for all. More able learners, just as much as any other group, deserve to have their needs recognised and catered for – and there is evidence to show that specific interventions and approaches can have a positive impact on their development. Currently, provision for more able learners in England, Wales and many other countries lacks consensus and consistency – leaving many learners lacking sufficient stretch and challenge.
Indeed, somewhat ironically, a focus on “equity” can in fact lead to the most able being neglected. As Gabriel Heller Sahlgren notes in a 2018 review of existing research in the field: “[A]s governments in general tend to focus in particular on increasing equity and raising achievement among low-performing pupils, the needs of gifted children are often ignored in western countries.”[1]
Outdated approaches are not an excuse for neglect
Fears about elitism are often linked to outdated view of “giftedness” as fixed, predetermined and/or class-based. With developments in understanding around neuroplasticity, the impact of mindset, effort and environment, there is now widespread recognition that ability is fluid and developmental. However, it is still the case that some people have the potential to achieve particularly highly in one or more fields. It is important that schools are equipped to recognise this and to ensure that such learners are given opportunities and support to develop as fully as possible.
While underachievement is not the only reason to focus on more able learners, it is a genuine concern. Research from bodies such as The Sutton Trust consistently highlights the pervasive gaps in achievement and opportunity when it comes to more able learners from disadvantaged backgrounds in particular. However, this is still only part of the picture. We don’t know how many young people could be achieving more, whether they fall within the “disadvantaged” criteria or not.
Wider benefits – for learners, schools and societies
Schools have a duty to ensure all learners have opportunities to explore, discover, share and develop their abilities, in all fields. The current focus on ensuring a broad and rich curricular and extracurricular offer for all has the potential to support this goal. In ensuring the curriculum offers sufficient levels of challenge, schools have the opportunity to raise standards and opportunities for all. And, as we see from schools working with the NACE Challenge Framework, a holistic focus on improving provision for the most able is likely to impact positively on provision, ethos and outcomes across the whole school.
There are also clear benefits at societal and economic levels in ensuring the potential of the most able is realised. Research suggests that increasing attainment at the highest levels has a particularly significant impact on annual per-capita growth.[2] Few would contest the view that modern economies need access to the full range of their population’s cognitive and creative abilities to stay competitive, and to address the major challenges and changes of the coming years.
A duty to meet the needs of every individual
Zooming back in from the whole-school, national or indeed international perspective, at its heart our mission is about the individual young people who could and do benefit from being recognised and supported as more able. While acknowledging that the “more able” label is – like all labels – imperfect, and that identification is a complex and ongoing process, we cannot allow these challenges to become excuses for neglecting the needs of those with the potential to achieve at the highest levels.
Importantly, there is evidence to suggest that this group – while by no means homogenous – do have specific needs and propensities, and that schools can respond effectively to these. More able learners can be particularly vulnerable to disengagement and to a range of pressures with both internal and external sources – including perfectionism, fear of failure, low self-esteem, imposter syndrome and social difficulties. Schools have a duty to ensure effective, specialised support is provided at all stages to ensure all more able learners have a chance to thrive.
What drives your school’s focus on more able learners, and what common myths and misconceptions have you encountered? Contact us to share your views and experiences.
[1] Heller Sahlgren, G. (2018), What works in gifted education? Centre for Education Economics.
[2] Hanushek, E. A. and Woessmann, L. (2012), Do better skills lead to more growth? Journal of Economic Growth 17: 267-321.
Blog Home
All Blogs
Print Page
RSS
