|
|
Speech
ADDRESS TO THE BIENNIAL CONFERENCE OF THE AUSTRALIAN ASSOCIATION FOR THE EDUCATION OF THE GIFTED AND TALENTED
‘Gifted 2006 – concepts, challenges and realities’
Wednesday, September 27, 2006
I am delighted to welcome you to the 11th Biennial National Conference of the Australian Association for the Education of the Gifted and Talented.
Let me begin with a case study, the story of a shy 31 year old Australian, Terence Tao, who was recently awarded the Fields Medal, the most prestigious international prize in mathematics, considered to be the mathematical equivalent of a Nobel Prize.
Born in Adelaide in 1975,Terence Tao has been blessed with an extraordinary intellect, a ‘one in a million’ IQ of 220.
He was also blessed with the good fortune of growing up in a supportive environment with the right mix of mentoring and nurturing, as well as enabling influences and circumstances which led him to achieve extraordinary heights.
Recently described as the “Mozart of Maths”, Terry’s prodigious talent was discovered at the age of two. His parents, noting his preference for reading and playing with magnetic numbers rather than playing with ‘normal’ toys such as cars and rubber balls, bought him maths books which he read voraciously, completing the primary school maths course at home before he was five.
He began high school at 7, university at 9, and at the ages of 10, 11 and 12 competed in the International Maths Olympiads winning bronze, silver and gold medals respectively – the only individual ever to have won a gold medal under the age of 13.
As a nine year old Terence spent two-thirds of his time at high school and a third at university. He was fortunate to live in an area with a primary school, a high school and a university all within a few minutes’ drive.
He was fortunate also not to suffer from underachievement, boredom, frustration or psychological distress which can be the fate of gifted children when their special needs are not met. He had teachers who recognised his talents at an early age and devised a flexible schedule in collaboration with his parents.
Importantly, the accelerated learning programme devised for him took into account his emotional development and he was not ‘pushed’ to achieve at the expense of his childhood.
Though he was recognised as being ‘wired differently’, he was not ostracised at school as a Nerd! Even though he had all the hallmarks - a self confessed ‘klutz’ who couldn’t tie his shoelaces till a late age, was clumsy with his hands, couldn’t kick a ball and sometimes wore his shirt back to front. By all accounts he is now a well adjusted, modest and delightful young man. His friends say he can talk footy and restaurants ‘like anyone else”. Although he can talk mathematics like no-one else!
I recently had the opportunity to meet Professor Garth Gaudry from Flinders University who taught Terence from the age of 12. Professor Gaudry said it was the “privilege of a lifetime” to teach him.
Terry Tao is a classic example of a high achiever being born and made, of nature and nurture combining to enable extraordinary talents to be optimised.
This is the kind of outcome we want for all our gifted and talented children.
This conference provides an excellent opportunity to progress this goal and to ensure that our educational policies and frameworks enable our gifted and talented children to reach for and attain their potential.
An integral part of the success of any conference is the calibre of the speakers and in this regard we are privileged to have a number of outstanding speakers from overseas and from Australia.
Let me now turn to the progress that has been made in gifted and talented education since the Senate Employment, Workplace Relations, Small Business and Education References Committee inquiry into The Education of Gifted Children findings were released in 2001.
When former Senator, Dr John Tierney, gave the opening address to the 2004 conference, he stated that the 2001 Senate Committee inquiry into the Education of Gifted Children had found that there had been little progress in educational provision for gifted children since the previous 1988 Senate Select Committee report on this subject. As a consequence, he said, the needs of many gifted children were not being met in the classroom. All submissions agreed that many gifted students were not being catered for in the mainstream education system and that these students needed to be considered as a priority.
The Senate Report made 20 wide ranging recommendations to enhance gifted education. The recommendations covered the role of teachers in identifying gifted children, including opportunities for professional development of teachers; the development and distribution of curriculum materials; and a strategy of raising public awareness of gifted education issues.
I am happy to say that, since then, progress has been made in response to several of the recommendations in the Report.
The package of measures announced by the Government in August 2004 for the development of a gifted education strategy, through the provision of $3.2 million for a series of national initiatives, has been largely implemented, with positive feedback from teachers and parents indicating that awareness of gifted education is growing.
As part of the funding package, the Australian Government allocated $2.3 million for the development and implementation of a professional learning package to help teachers and school leaders recognise and respond to gifted children in the classroom, including gifted students from minority and disadvantaged groups.
The package, which was developed by Professor Miraca Gross and her colleagues at the Gifted Education Research, Resource and Information Centre at the University of NSW, includes strategies to identify gifted students and incorporate a range of valuable intervention strategies to address their needs, such as modification of curriculum, accelerated learning or ability groupings.
All jurisdictions worked with the Australian Government in the development of this package and the formation of an advisory group to oversee its development. I understand that a number of members of the advisory group are attending this conference.
The first part, Core Modules, has already been developed in CD format, used as part of Australian Government Quality Teaching Programme professional learning activities, and distributed to all schools in Australia.
The second part of the professional learning package, Extension and Specialisation Modules, has recently been distributed to all schools in Australia. They cover the same topics as the Core Modules in greater depth and complexity.
In response to the 2001 Senate Report, the Australian Government has also provided 16 grants of $10,000 to academics in education faculties around Australia to gain formal qualifications in gifted education. This will also assist teacher education faculties in universities to acquire expertise in gifted education.
Submissions to the Senate Inquiry also highlighted the problems and difficulties faced by gifted students and their parents in rural and isolated areas. In more remote areas, there may be no choice of schooling and fewer services for families and teachers than in metropolitan areas.
In response, the Australian Government has provided $550,000 for 50 parent workshops (including 4 online workshops) to provide opportunities for people who live in regional and remote areas of Australia to learn about gifted children and their education. The workshops are designed to improve parents' understanding of gifted education issues and research, and to provide advice to parents about how they can meet the needs of their children at home and at school.
While there has been some useful progress, nevertheless, some of the concerns and challenges expressed at your previous conference still remain. In spite of the work that has been done, there are still concerns about negative attitudes to gifted children in schools and in the wider community.
As a nation, we must appreciate that there are students at both ends of the spectrum. There are students who need assistance to improve in the key areas of literacy and numeracy at one end, and then there are students who will be our leaders in a wide range of areas. We need to ensure that our educational system does not only support struggling students. We need balance, and we need to invest in our gifted students.
We need to raise the bar for all students.
It is a fact that some parents are accused of being pushy, of ‘not allowing their children to be children’ and of exaggerating abilities or somehow forcing their children to learn at a level beyond the average. The situation is more difficult for parents and children from less advantaged backgrounds.
A recurring theme in the field of gifted education is the fact that gifted children are found in all socio-economic and ethnic groups. It is important for there to be a focus within schools on identifying gifted students particularly for children who may lack support outside school.
The initiatives I have outlined, as well as other measures introduced through the groups represented here, have improved the awareness of parents and educators.
However, it is critical that the gifted students at greatest risk of non-identification remain a focus of our efforts. The 1988 Senate report clearly identified the groups of students who fall into this category.
They include gifted children:
- from economically disadvantaged backgrounds;
- from culturally diverse backgrounds who are learning English as a second language;
- those with a learning disability; or
- with physical disabilities - for example visually impaired or hearing impaired gifted students;
- students in geographically isolated areas;
- those whose love of learning has been diminished by years of repetitive and unchallenging curriculum; and
- those who deliberately camouflage their abilities for peer acceptance.
Students who are obviously performing well are easier to identify than students who may be gifted, but are not performing to their potential. It is these latter students who are at risk of falling through the cracks.
Professor Gagné’s work on differentiating between “gifted” and “talented” has provided an excellent framework for identifying those gifted students who may not be exhibiting their potential talent due to the reasons I have just outlined.
By using Professor Gagné’s definition of “gifted”, which is a measure of a child’s outstanding potential, rather than outstanding performance, parents and teachers can identify underachieving gifted students who may have abilities that are well beyond the average but who have not been able to translate this into performance.
While measures such as selective schooling are helping gifted students reach their potential, most gifted students will not have access to such facilities. This includes students in regional and remote areas and Indigenous communities.
It is therefore essential that the identification of gifted students in the context of the mainstream schools system be encouraged.
This highlights the need for more work on teacher training.
Training can significantly enhance teachers’ effectiveness in identifying and nurturing gifted students. The teachers in the audience today will be well aware of the challenges including the additional work you have to put in for these high performing students.
Australian Government teaching related policies and programmes are driven by research findings both here and overseas and that research confirms that quality teaching is by far the most important factor that influences the educational outcomes of our children, accounting for up to 60% of the variation in learning outcomes.
Australian Government initiatives in this area are therefore primarily focused on improving the quality of teachers and teaching by funding opportunities for teacher professional learning. Our main vehicle for doing this is the 10-year $300 million Australian Government Quality Teacher Programme.
In addition to the $3.2 million I have already mentioned, eight activities in the area of Gifted and Talented Education are being run by states and territories with Programme funding in 2006.
The Australian Government is also aware of the important role of preparing new teacher graduates to meet the needs of gifted and talented students.
Among other issues, the current House of Representatives Standing Committee on Education and Vocational Training Inquiry into Teacher Education is examining the preparation of primary and secondary graduates to deal with children with special needs. I expect to receive the report of the Inquiry later this year.
There are still challenges ahead in bringing the education of the gifted and talented into the mainstream of schools education. The Australian Government is committed to doing its part and will be considering some of the issues I have raised today in the medium term.
I am currently considering a number of options. I can announce today that I am having investigated the possibility of establishing a National Centre for Excellence in Gifted Education, which would concentrate resources, coordinate and assist with the establishment and implementation of further initiatives on a national basis. It would promote a consistent definition and approach to gifted education, and undertake more Australian-based research.
As an immediate initiative, I can announce that the Australian Government will allocate $200,000, to commence in 2007, for the provision of further professional development in Gifted Education for teachers.
I am pleased to support the 11th National Conference of the Association for the Education of Gifted and Talented here in my home state. Judging by the speakers, the subject material on offer and the obvious enthusiasm of participants, I have every confidence that this conference will inspire and challenge all delegates in their knowledge and understanding of the needs of the gifted and talented.
END...........
|
