The need for a challenge.

Too often, gifted children are given no special provision. The understanding of many teachers and educational authorities is that the gifted will naturally do well and need no particular attention. What they haven't actually given any thought to is: do well at what? Should a gifted child be given no greater challenge than that of their average age-mates? Most school systems do just that and give their gifted nothing more to do than they would any other child.

Yet, from my experience, I would say that a gifted child should be challenged. They should be given something that demands more of them. Observing Ainan's quickness of mind when he was six, we decided that he needed something to challenge him - or at least appease, to some extent, the drive to understand that he was exhibiting. Thus it was that he began to take exams more typical of young adults. It was a good decision.

What might surprise some people is Ainan's reaction to being required to take science exams. He loves it. He gets a buzz from doing them. When asked what he felt about one particular science exam, for instance, he said: "Happy." It actually made him happy to sit in an exam room faced with a paper which would distress many average students.

That is a key difference between gifted students and the average child - and one that should not be ignored. Gifted students need a challenge - and the more gifted they are, the more of a challenge they need. Ainan is happiest when he is immersed in an intellectual challenge typical of a young adult science student. This is what gives him a sense of excitement.

Now, that might seem strange to some people, but it is important to understand this type of reaction if gifted students are to receive an appropriate education. Far from being "stressed" by a challenging academic situation, Ainan enjoys it. It is actually what makes him happy.

It seems to me that most educational systems - Singapore's included - do not know this. A happy gifted child is a challenged gifted child - by which I mean that the level of stimulus should match the level of ability. In some cases, this means that a rigorous exam is the recipe for a smiling child.

(If you would like to learn more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, a scientific child prodigy, aged eight years and seven months, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, five years exactly, and Tiarnan, twenty-eight months, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html I also write of gifted education, IQ, intelligence, the Irish, the Malays, Singapore, College, University, Chemistry, Science, genetics, left-handedness, precocity, child prodigy, child genius, baby genius, adult genius, savant, wunderkind, wonderkind, genio, гений ребенок prodigy, genie, μεγαλοφυία θαύμα παιδιών, bambino, kind.

We are the founders of Genghis Can, a copywriting, editing and proofreading agency, that handles all kinds of work, including technical and scientific material. If you need such services, or know someone who does, please go to: http://www.genghiscan.com/ Thanks.

This blog is copyright Valentine Cawley. Unauthorized duplication prohibited. Use Only with Permission. Thank you.)

The differences between examining boards.

Ainan sat for the O level at the London Edexcel examining board. However, the Board we prepared for was the Singapore Cambridge Board.

Why did we do this? Well, we didn't know that there were any real differences. Indeed, we were told at the outset by someone who should know, that the Boards were much the same. This did not prove to be the case.

Ainan studied Singapore Chemistry textbooks for his O level. They cover the Singapore Cambridge syllabus. He did not study the London Edexcel syllabus - the one he actually went on to take.

About a week or two before the exam, we got a chance to look at the London Edexcel papers and syllabus. We were shocked at what we saw. The papers were VERY different in style and content. The London Edexcel questions were more difficult in many ways: they demanded greater chemical understanding and they covered topics and areas that are NOT covered in the Singapore Cambridge syllabus. As a result, I did not know whether it would be possible for Ainan to sit the exam at all. It was too late to do anything about it.

We tried to get London Edexcel textbooks to see if he could cover the major differences between the syllabuses at the last moment. We tried every major bookshop in Singapore - but NONE of them stocked ANY of the recommended texts. We thought this strange - but it just goes to show how major the differences between the two syllabi are. Clearly, the bookshops judged the London Edexcel recommended books useless for the local Singapore Cambridge syllabus - and vice-versa presumably, since they had elected not to stock any of them. We asked at Borders to check their ordering system - and not one of the books was available even to be ordered by Borders.

We elected, after some heartache, to go ahead with the exam, because Ainan would get bored if forced to wait another six months to sit for it. He went ahead and passed. So, it was a good decision. Yet, had the Board been the one he had prepared for - and not one distinctly different, I think he would have had a lot easier time of it.

We have learnt a lesson though: all exams are not the same - and the syllabi may differ greatly, contrary to expectations.

Anyway, Ainan passed the London Edexcel Chemisty O Level without even having seen the right textbooks. How did he do it? Well, he told me that he had to work out some of the questions himself, using his knowledge of chemistry in general as a guide, with no prior experience of the areas in question - in other words, he had to "wing it", as we used to say when I was younger.

(If you would like to read more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, a scientific child prodigy, aged seven years and four months, and his gifted brothers, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html I also write of gifted education, IQ, intelligence, child prodigy, child genius, baby genius, adult genius, savant, the creatively gifted, gifted adults and gifted children in general. Thanks).

Raymond Ravaglia on out of level testing

As regular readers will know, Raymond Ravaglia, the Deputy Director of EPGY, the Education Program for Gifted Youth, at Stanford University recently gave a talk in Singapore.

He spoke of several things: one of them was his views on out-of-level testing. He considered this form of testing to be ill-conceived. In his eyes, there was no reason why a gifted child would be able to handle the material, for it was unlikely that the gifted child would have covered the material. It didn't make any sense to him that a child should be tested on material the child was probably unaware of. This was, in his opinion, very likely to generate a "false negative" - that is a child would be marked as "non-gifted" by an out of level test, simply because they had never met the material before when, in fact, they were gifted.

Raymond Ravaglia thought that it was wiser to design tests which were in-level, in the sense of being of material covered by the child at the relevant age, but which were designed to be more challenging in their presentation of questions. In this way, a child would not be penalized for not having covered a particular curriculum and would have the opportunity to show their gift, without distortion. He thought that this was much more likely to give a positive result for a gifted child and would not lead to false negatives, and loss of opportunity for the gifted child.

I had rather come to Raymond Ravaglia's view, myself, when first introduced to the idea of out-of-level testing - but it is interesting to see this opinion held by someone working in the American University system. The reasoning on the issue is sound...so why then does the practise of out-of-level testing persist?

Out-of-level testing is based on a misconception about what a gifted child is. A gifted child is a more intelligent child than an average one and is able to learn faster. Yet, a gifted child is not a miracle worker. If the child has not been exposed to the curriculum in question, one cannot expect that child to perform according to their true ability. They will under-perform if the curriculum is new.

My son, Ainan, has been subject to "out-of-level" testing in his area of Chemistry. In his case, the procedure is OK because he does, in fact, have much knowledge of Chemistry beyond his age range. In this case, the practise may be appropriate. Yet, in most cases, such a form of testing is likely to lead to a mismeasure of the child - and therefore should be avoided. If the child does have out-of-level knowledge - then test away. If the child has great ability but does not have out-of-level knowledge then such testing is really going to be harmful.

So, think carefully before consenting to such testing: the results could compromise your child's future and close doors that might have been opened by a different kind of testing.

(If you would like to read about Ainan Celeste Cawley, a scientific child prodigy, aged seven years and three months, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, three, and Tiarnan, thirteen months, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html I also write of gifted education, IQ, intelligence, child prodigy, child genius, baby genius, adult genius, savant, the creatively gifted, gifted children and gifted adults in general. Thanks.)

Observation of Ainan's composure under stress

When I was a boy, my least favourite time was the taking of examinations. I always managed to do well...but I also always managed to feel very stressed by them. I can't say I enjoyed them, but society requires them of its children, for their advancement, and so, like most others, I endured them.

Yesterday I had the chance to observe Ainan in the same situation. His reaction was unlike mine: he was very composed, quiet, contained, focussed. Perhaps he felt the stress of it, but he didn't appear stressed - it was all very much under control within.

When he had finished, I asked him how it was. He gave a one word answer: "Fine", with a little nod. That minimalism is again Ainan's style: the matter was done, he had felt it went "fine" - and that was that: on to the next challenge.

Looking at the way he was, I must say I prefer his reaction to the one I remember for myself. It seems probable that he will have a better time of educational stresses than I did: from yesterday's example it seems fairly sure. I am thankful for that.