STRUCTURAL DIFFERENTIATION AND INTEGRATION IN EDUCATIONAL ORGANISATIONS

An essay submitted by Andrew William Panton, M.A. Dip.Ed. as course work on the Diploma in Education Management course at Bristol Polytechnic 1973-74.

With reference to educational organisations, comment on the influences affecting the balance to be achieved between structural differentiation and integration.

In common with other organisations, educational institutions require a structure through which their activities, resources and formal authority may be both allocated and coordinated. Indeed, it is only by this conscious process of organisation structuring that their stated objectives are achieved. Such structuring involves two distinctive modes of operation: differentiation and integration. Because a school incorporates many variable and diverse activities, structural differentiation is required in order that its discrete objectives may be achieved. This differentiation necessitates the allocation of objectives, resources and authority into sub-units of the organisation. However, although every member of the organisation contributes something different, they must all contribute towards a common goal. Structural integration is therefore required in order to ensure that the efforts of all staff pull in the same direction. Integration involves the coordination, evaluation and central control of the activities of sub-units.

Until recently, most schools were structured according to tradition. The organisation was divided into academic departments, and the only coordination considered necessary was provided by the head master and his deputy. This traditional structure emphasised the mode of differentiation and implied an assumption that, if the discrete objectives of the school were attended to by the sub-units, the overall objectives of the school would be achieved. This assumption was of course unjustified, although it must be said that in the small schools of the past almost any organisation sufficed to ensure that a minimum level of effectiveness was maintained. In the past decade, however, the organisational landscape of schools has changed considerably. The existence of so-called 'senior management teams' in our schools of today indicates that there is now a strongly perceived need for integration as a significant element in the organisation structuring of schools. This change can be seen to have occurred as a result of the following four factors: the increasing size of schools, the gradual comprehensivisation of secondary schools, the introduction of management techniques and the blurring of the frontiers of subject disciplines. These four factors have contributed to a very fluid situation as far as the organisation of schools is concerned. Innovations abound. No longer can a head master take his school's organisation structure for granted; indeed its design is one of his most pressing responsibilities. Before arriving at the structure he thinks most appropriate for his school, a head master must attempt to answer the following two questions: what are the optimum amounts of differentiation and integration required? and what elements in the organisation should be subject to each mode of operation? These are the central problems of organisation structuring.

In assessing the balance to be achieved between differentiation and integration, many factors and influences have to be taken into account. Peter F. Drucker writes:

"In discussing organisation structure, we have to ask both what kind of structure is needed and how it should be built. Each question is important; and only if we can answer both systematically can we hope to arrive at a  sound, effective and durable structure." (Peter F. Drucker, 'The Practice of Management', p.190.)

Drucker was writing about the organisation of commercial enterprises, but the general principles of his theory apply equally well to the organisation of schools. He continues:

" ... the starting point of any analysis of organisation cannot be a discussion of structure. It must be the analysis of the business. The first question in discussing organisation structure must be: What is our business and what should it be? Organisation structure must be designed so as to make possible the attainment of the objectives of the business for for five, ten, fifteen years hence.

"There are three specific ways to find out what kind of a structure is needed to attain the objectives of a specific business: activities analysis, decision analysis, relations analysis." (Peter F. Drucker, ibid. p.190.)

This triple analysis could be profitably undertaken by the head master or principal of an educational organisation as the first stage of an exercise in organisation structuring.

It is natural to expect that the objectives of a school, college or other educational establishment should be manifested in the activities that it encompasses; equally one would expect that the organisational structure would reflect, and be partly determined by, those activities. Until recently, however, an analysis of activities would have been very unusual in a school. The traditional assumption that the functions of a school were fulfilled by its subject departments would have been unquestioned. In fact, the activities could never have been adequately analysed by the departmental structure, as the socialisation and selection functions of the teacher's role have always been with him. Although in the past these functions were carried out informally and with a minimum of institutional support, the size and nature of our modern secondary schools have been instrumental in bringing about an increasing formalisation of many of the teacher's diverse tasks. The following are just some of the areas of activity for which provision has to be made in the school's organisational structure:

1.  Curriculum.                                       8.  Vocational guidance.
2.  Reports and evaluation.                    9.  Liaison with other educational institutions.
3.  Discipline.                                        10.  Extra-curricular activities.
4.  Pastoral care.                                   11.  Safety precautions.
5.  Staff development.                           12.  Financial administration.
6.  Examination administration.             13.  Maintenance of buildings.

This list makes it abundantly clear that the business of a school is wider than classroom teaching and the preparation of children for examinations, although it is still generally accepted that these are their primary functions. These non-teaching functions can basically be reduced to two areas of activity - pastoral care and administration. Pastoral care involves concern for the individual needs of each pupil, and might include private counselling, liaison with parents, vocational guidance and discipline. The administrative aspects of the school's task centre around the management of all the resources and facilities that support the educational process. It is evident from this activities analysis that considerable differentiation is required in a school's organisational structure to provide the expertise to cope with such a diverse range of tasks. The increasing size of secondary schools has compelled structural recognition of these non-teaching functions: one finds heads of pastoral departments and bursars in many comprehensive schools who attend to the counselling and  administrative aspects, respectively. In addition to these diversifications in the traditional structure of schools, an activities analysis into the academic work of the school might suggest that the old breakdown of subject departments requires some modification. The classics department, a traditional feature of the structure of the old grammar school, may be obsolete in a comprehensive. New curricular areas, such as humanities and drama, that combine the work of previous departments, may be worthy of departmental status in a modern secondary school. The dilemma of the senior drama teacher in Nailsea (Comprehensive) School was sensitively portrayed by Elizabeth Richardson in her book, 'The Teacher, the School and the Task of Management'. Although he had the use of the services of six members of staff, the lack of departmental status for his subject weakened its ability to compete for timetable space with other more established subjects. Activities analysis involves calculating not just how many bottles there are, so to speak, but how much liquid goes into them. For only by knowing the size and importance of each sub-unit can the status of these sub-units relative to each other be assessed and the structural components of differentiation be determined. This question directly affects not only the structure of the school's organisation, but also the prestige and salaries of posts. Thus, while an analysis of the various separate areas of activity undertaken by the school is vital to enable the head master to differentiate his structure, an assessment of the importance of sub-units has implications for their integration.

The second analytical tool, mentioned by Drucker, for an investigation of organisational structure is a decision analysis. The kind and subject matter of the vast majority of the problems that arise in a school have a high degree of predictability. The nature of the decisions which these problems entail should determine who in the school's structure should take them. Four characteristics affect the nature of decisions. One of them is the degree of futurity in the decision. For how long is the school committed by it? The decision as to which books to order from the local library for use in pupil assignments can easily be reversed and does not commit anyone, whereas the purchase of an expensive set of textboooks or teaching materials from a small annual grant for books is a decision that is certain to have long-term consequences as regards teaching methods. One would therefore expect the latter decision to be taken at a higher level than the former. What is really significant here is not so much the importance of the decision, but the extent to which it may be reversed. The next characteristic of decisions to be considered is the impact of them on other areas of the school. A decision that affects only one area of activity may be taken at the lowest level, but otherwise it should be taken at a place in the structure that enables a thorough consideration of its consequences on all areas likely to be affected. A question of teaching method, however important, can be appropriately resolved within a subject department, whereas as problems of curriculum development cut across the departmental structure of the school, and decisions in this area must be taken or coordinated at a higher level, either by the top management group or by a staff committee. In matters of pupil; subject options it would be necessary to consult both pastoral and academic authorities, as well as of course parents, and responsibilities in this field must also reside at senior levels within the school. Another important characteristic of a decision is the degree to which ethical and social values enter into it. As the reputation of the school may be at stake where such values are involved, the decision should move to a higher level. Questions of pupil discipline are good examples of situations where decisions are affected by both ethical and social considerations. Decisions on the type of punishment to be used, and appropriate instances where such punishments may be applied, should be taken by the school's top management, although the application of the rules once they have been laid down may be left to junior staff. That some local education authorities have banned the use of corporal punishment is a significant illustration of the tendency for disciplinary questions to be decided high up in the structure of educational organisations. Finally, decisions can be analysed as to whether they are recurrent, rare or unique. The recurrent decision requires the establishment of a rule or decision in principle at the appropriate level, but the routine application of the rule to specific cases can be delegated to lower levels.  The rare or unique decision has to be referred to a senior level in order that its full implications may be thoroughly pondered. Futurity, impact, ethical content and frequency are, therefore, the four criteria through which an organisation can determine the nature of a decision. Such an analysis enables the head master of a school to construct a decision-making paradigm, or algorithm, into which incoming problems can be fed, and through which they can be processed. Furthermore, this decision analysis is fundamental to the task of organisation structuring:

"Analysing the foreseeable therefore shows both what structure of top management the enterprise needs and what authority and responsibility different levels of operating management should have." (Peter F. Drucker, ibid, p.195.)

Clearly the main implications of decision analysis for the organisation structuring of the school concern the integration aspects of the task.

The third analysis of use in assessing what kind of structure is required is a relations analysis. Like the decision analysis it furnishes the head master with data of use in determining how much integration the organisation requires. Relations analysis involves a study of how managers interact in an organisation. In schools, the task of a head of subject department, a pastoral head or a head of house relates upwards to the top management group and downwards to the teachers who are his subordinates. But the task also involves sideways relations. Heads of subject departments will be closely drawn together over matters of curriculum development and inter-disciplinary enquiry, and may have a variety of other reasons, such as the progress of individual pupils, to cause them to liaise. The heads of pastoral sections, where the pastoral system is a horizontal one, will need to coordinate their plans, and in a vertical system heads of houses will wish to discuss matters of joint interest. Furthermore, pupil subject option questions will be of joint interest to both subject and pastoral heads, and pupil progress will obviously be of combined concern to both as well. It is vital that all necessary working relationships are catered for in the formal structure of the school. Integration here can be provided by the top management team or by staff committees. Relations analysis helps to clarify how these areas of the structure should be staffed.

The three analyses just described enable the head master to obtain information as to the purposes for which both differentiation and integration in the organisational structure of the school are required. The next question which has to be asked in an organisation structuring exercise is how the structure should be built. This involves a consideration of the operational requirements that the management structure of the school has to fulfil. Chris Argyris in his book, 'Integrating the Individual and the Organization', asserts that all business enterprises have three core activities: 1) Achieving objectives; 2) Maintaining the internal system; and 3) Adapting to the external environment. Argyris goes on to define the effective organisation as one that is able "to accomplish its three core activities at a constant or increasing level of effectiveness with the same or decreasing increments of inputs of energy". Although Argyris was talking about business organisations, this definition can, mutatis mutandis, be applied equally well to schools and other educational organisations. To be successful, the management structure of a school must be able to hold its own in all three of Argyris' core activities. This trilateral approach to management will have implications for the way in which the management structure will be built.

The first requirement of the school's management structure is that it should directly facilitate the achievement of the school's objectives or goals. In schools, it is all too easy to forget the primary tasks of the organisation. Subsidiary tasks have an insidious habit of taking over. For instance, the school management may become so obsessed with the problem of thieving in the bicycle sheds that the educational progress of the pupil is temporarily forgotten. It is also important that the efforts of individual teachers should be channelled into those directions that will ensure the fulfilment of the school's aims. Schools abound, however, with teachers whose efforts are not so directed. There is the teacher whose pedantic attendance to detail in certain areas, such as marking, is often a mechanism of defence against real educational problems. Then there is the teacher, often elderly, whose main energies go towards the preservation of the prerogatives of his subject discipline and of his professional status. There is also the irritating 'robber baron' type of teacher, who changes everything and irritates everyone, and then, having asserted himself at everyone's expense, moves on to another school. Another problem teacher is the type who believes that the teaching of his subject specialism is his only task. He will teach geography to the highest standards possible, but will leave management to others. This type is a most serious problem, as such teachers often include the most able. Their exclusive concentration on one of the sub-goals of the institution, and the consequent deflection of the school's primary aim that such an attitude entails, are some of the main dangers that can stem from structural differentiation, and it is important that the efforts of all sub-units should be synchronised with, and not be destructive of, the common aim of the school. If the sub-units of the school are too sharply differentiated, the consequence will be that the perspective of each department becomes too narrow. Ignorance of, and antipathy towards, the work of another department may follow. It is a clear function of structural integration to ensure that the operations of sub-units do not become dysfunctional to the school as a whole. Denys John, the head master of Nailsea School, has written of the dangers of "a gulf developing between heads of department and pastoral staff". He believes that:

"While large schools need pastoral staff as much as as they need heads of departments, everything possible should be done to unite senior staff members in both roles. There are already influences and expectations which operate all too powerfully to divide them." (Denys John, 'Senior Staff Roles in Secondary Schools", in 'Trends', No ?, p.4)

Elizabeth Richardson explains how such integration was eventually achieved in the middle school of Nailsea:

"Once Clive Vanloo was given authority over the curricular arrangements for the fourth year, it had to be recognised that his role included the coordination of house affairs and therefore placed him on the boundary that enclosed all house boundaries. It was in recognition of that reality that he was officially redesignated as 'head of middle school' in April 1969. Thenceforward the house heads and their tutorial staff had to recognise, as did other members of staff, that his role could no longer be associated only with the curricular side of the school's work, but had to be associated also with the pastoral side". (Elizabeth Richardson, 'The Teacher, the School, and the Task of Management', pp.136-7.)

Integration between the curricular and the pastoral aspects of the school's work was provided by a new post in the management team. However, just as structural differentiation can weaken the 'business performance' of a school by too sharp a focussing on the sub-goals of the institution, so also can it attenuate the school's ability to achieve its goals if it leads to a 'mushrooming' in the hierarchy of the organisation. For it is a cardinal organisation principle that a structure should contain the least possible number of management levels and forge the shortest possible chain of control. Drucker writes:

"Every additional level makes the attainment of common direction and mutual understanding more difficult. Every additional level distorts objectives and misdirects attention. Every link in the chain sets up additional stresses, and creates one more source of inertia, friction and slack." (Peter F. Drucker, ibid, p.200.)

A proliferation of posts in the school is likely to lead to a growth in the specialised nature of the work of most senior staff, a process which will be accompanied by centrifugal strains in the organisation. The specialised nature of a teacher's work may direct his vision and efforts away from the main objectives of staff consultation:

"In any examination of the managerial structure of a school, the first question which must be considered is the role of the head and the manner in which he arranges for consultation with his colleagues and participation by them in the making of policy. Articles of Government in maintained schools place upon the head the ultimate accountability. But this does not imply that he should ignore the need to involve his colleagues in discussion about policy. Only by such discussion can staff members maintain and develop their stature as responsible professional people. However few policies are likely to be implemented successfully without the informed support of all the teachers involved. In the final analysis, this is going to mean that the entire staff group, however large, must participate in discussion." (Denys John. ibid.)

Staff consultation is an important integrating influence in the organisational structure of schools. The manner in which decisions shall be taken in the school can be systematically resolved. R.G.Owens in his book, 'Organizational Behaviour in Schools', suggests a 'Paradigm for Shared Decision Making'. The use of members of staff in setting the School's objectives and in subsequent decisions is an important method of motivating teachers. It is also important however that the senior management team of a school should not appear to be attracting to itself the rights and prerogatives that formerly belonged to the heads of departments or other posts in the organisational structure. Equally, a bureaucratisation that denies the practising teacher some of the freedoms he formerly held is undesirable. Wherever possible decisions should be taken by staff as a team, particularly in matters where previous rights may be affected. The sensitive treatment of personnel is vital to the success of an organisation, and the need to motivate staff in a positive manner is one of the most important influences affecting the balance between structural differentiation and integration. Too much differentiation will discriminate against the organisation, too much integration and direction will weaken the commitment of the staff towards the achievement of the school's aims.

Motivating the staff is one part of maintaining the internal system of the school; concern for staff development and for the progress of the individual teacher is another. Denys John has some interesting views on this need:

"The management of a school must obviously find ways of discharging this responsibility to offer opportunities to its staff to develop and grow. Three aspects of  this question may be worth mentioning. First,  the consultative procedures must be real. Effective participation which enables teachers to influence decisions also helps to ensure that they are well informed and aware of the issues. Secondly, the head (or a top management colleague) must devote time to the initiation of new members of staff, to discovering and utilising their particular skills and interests and to encouraging them to take advantage of particular courses of study. The same senior staff members may also be responsible for similar work with student teachers. At the same time he may be responsible for advising upon future career needs and perhaps promotion within the school of  more experienced teachers. Thirdly, the management structure of a school might well include a trainee level of responsibility. Such a grade of appointment (Burnham Scale 2 perhaps) could at one and the same time offer teachers in their third or fourth year of teaching some insight into the tasks of more experienced teachers as well as relieving those senior staff of the more routine aspects of the roles they discharge." (Denys John, ibid.)

Responsibility for staff development clearly enables structural differentiation if a member of the senior staff is to be designated to it. Such a post could be justified in a large school. However, staff development implies a limit on differentiation as too many specialised posts are likely to prejudice the training and testing of tomorrow's top managers, one of the essential functions of organisational structure. Although experience as a functional specialist may be necessary to a teacher early in his career, too great an exposure to a specialist will narrow him. He must also be put in positions where he can see the whole of the business of a school even if he does not carry much responsibility. The need for the head masters of the future to acquire experience of work involving integration earlier in their careers has important implications too for organisation structuring.

The third and final core activity of an organisation, according to Argyris, is the need to adapt to the external environment. In stable conditions it could be argued that this would present a school with few difficulties. However, in the last decade schools have had to contend with an unparalleled amount of change in almost every aspect of the educational enterprise. The need for an educational structure which is capable of managing innovation, and of responding to environmental instability, must be one of the head master's paramount concerns. It is all too easy for schools to be producer dominated, that is to produce what it is convenient for them to produce, and not to respond to society's changing demands. The continuous state of innovation that such such demands require necessitates changes in the managerial and organisational structure of the school. T.Burns and G.M.Stalker in their book, "The Management of Innovation", juxtapose two different types of management structure, identifiable at either end of a continuum: the 'mechanistic', or hierarchical structure, which is appropriate to stable conditions only, and the 'organic'or network structure, which is appropriate to changing conditions, which give rise constantly to to new and unforeseen problems. One of the weaknesses of mechanistic organisations is that differentiation follows structure: in times of great change such structures can become dysfunctional. The final integration of tasks, and the only comprehensive picture of the organisation, are the prerogative of the top of the hierarchy, while those members of the organisation who are carrying out the sub-tasks will tend to take a narrow view of the organisation and lack interest in its primary objectives. The problem arises that the man at the top of the structure is the only man to be able to initiate change, but he is largely insulated from the organisation's problems, and the specialised manager, while able to see many of the problems, lacks the overall or knowledge to enable him to take the action necessary to resolve them. In addition, the location of authority and control at the top of the hierarchy reduces subordinates' scope for initiative, and therefore their commitment.The characteristics of the organic structure are more suited to unstable conditions, encourage the teamwork approach, and reward individual enterprise. Authority, control and communication form a network, not a hierarchy, and responsibility is to the school as a whole, not to an immediate superior. The tendency in an organic structure for communications to be lateral, rather than vertical, is well illustrated by the system of committees in Denys John's school at Nailsea, which is described by Elizabeth Richardson. Such structures are stratified and the lead in joint decision-making will still fall to seniors. However, this will come not through the authority of office but through expertise, not just in a subject of discipline but through expertise, not just in a subject or discipline, but from ideas in the whole curriculum. Leadership in an organic structure involves looking for the team approach, and is characterised by the ability to work with a group of people. Curriculum development, and the related ideas of team teaching and inter-disciplinary enquiry, all require such an approach. The teamwork approach, characterised by the existence of a committee system within the school, is not only able to implement innovation effectively, but, due to the multi-specialised composition of its committees, is able to recognise and diagnose problems quickly, and to plan those changes that may alleviate them. The network structure is able to provide the necessary element of integration into the structure, while avoiding the crushing effects of a bureaucracy on individual initiative, and it is therefore likely to be more proficient than the mechanistic structure at enabling the school to respond to changes in its environment.

The implications for the organisational structure of the school of the requirement to cater for the three core activities of all organisations have now been considered. The traditional structure of the secondary school, with its emphasis on differentiation, and with integration provided only at the top of the structure, is no longer fitted to cope with the numerous and diverse problems of today's large comprehensive schools. A new management structure is required that will focus on the three core activities of the organisation. In this new structure differentiation will always be necessary, but wherever possible such decentralisation should be federal and not functional. Subject departments will continue to be the basic sub-units of the school's resources (both staff and financial) so long, that is, as learning remains the primary objective. But the departmental structure should be subordinated operationally to sub-units that incorporate most of the school's functions. Upper, middle and lower schools, to which as much autonomy as possible in curricular and pastoral matters should be delegated, would provide a structure capable of fulfilling the necessary characteristics of the modern educational organisation. Only in such a horizontal structure can curricular and pastoral responsibilities be satisfactorily integrated. Although operational responsibility in the school would have been decentralised, the head of a section would have responsibilities across the whole range of the school's activities, and thus would provide him with excellent training for future employment as a head master. His position would enable him to integrate the curricular and pastoral activities of his section, and ensure that neither function could proceed independently of the other, and thereby distort the aims of the school. It is a very real danger today that too much of the teacher's expertise will be dissipated in pastoral or counselling work. The heads of these three horizontal sections would be in an excellent position to  integrate the curricular and pastoral work of teachers in their areas of responsibility. They could ensure both that pastoral activity was properly confined to supporting the learning process, and that the curricula provided for their respective sections were suited to the individual needs of pupils. This integrated approach should assist the school to achieve its overall goals. In addition, this federal decentralisation should be instrumental in helping the school to function effectively as regards its othe dnagersher core activities. The autonomy granted to sections and the encouragement of the teamwork approach should motivate teachers to greater efforts, while the horizontal structure of the school with its 'across the board' responsibilities should provide a greater responsiveness to change than is possible in a vertical structure. In addition, this structure would naturally facilitate staff development by involving teachers in a wide range of the school's activities. Such a structure would be complex in that it would necessitate the division of a teachers duties between section and department. For, although tutorial responsibilities could be limited to one section, the interests of most teachers will dictate that most of them will continue to teach throughout the school. The subject department will therefore be required to organise the learning process throughout the school. However, curricular policy should largely be left to the lower, middle and upper school sections. If subject departments were seen as providing a consumer service in support of these sections, rather than as having an independent operational existence of their own, the dangers of structural differentiation might be greatly reduced. Moreover, the diffusion of teaching duties throughout the school will also help to avoid any tendency for staff to ignore the needs of the other sections.

Just as differentiation in the school's structure is vital, so too is integration. Indeed, in the large school, the need for integration becomes more urgent. It is essential, however, that as much of this integration as possible should be provided by the practising teachers themselves rather than by a downbearing senior management team controlling the school on bureaucratic lines. Much of the necessary integration could be provided by a network of committees organised both within and across the boundaries of the horizontal sections. What, then, should be the composition of the senior management team, and what should be its functions? The team itself should be as small as possible, and should involve the minimum of structural levels. It would probably include the head master, the deputy heads, and the heads of the three sections previously discussed. Its main functions would be to ensure that all the task and group maintenance functions of the organisation are fulfilled, and that the work of the sub-units, both sections and departments, should be directly related to the aims of the school. Some key areas of the senior management team's responsibilities might be as follows:

1.  Coordinating the activities of sub-units through an appropriate system of committees.
2.  Providing an information-seeking and monitoring service for the purposes of evaluation and innovation management.              
3.  Allocation and management of capitation grants to subject departments.
4.  Supply and maintenance of resources and facilities used by the school.
5.  Staff welfare and development.
6.  Public relations and liaison with other educational establishments.

Once they have ensured that the proper institutional support is provided, the members of the senior management team should interfere as little as possible in the processes by which the three sections seek to achieve their objectives. In short, they should ensure that the school is effectively managed, but not seek to fulfil all management functions themselves. As long, therefore, as structural integration is achieved primarily by teachers themselves working together as a team, rather than imposed upon them from above, it will be entirely beneficial.

A school which is decentralised into federal units, and which operates internally through a network control system that utilises the professional expertise of all members of staff, should be effective in fulfilling its core activities, and should achieve a satisfactory balance between differentiation and integration in its organisational structure.


                                                      BIBLIOGRAPHY

C. Argyris, 'Integrating the Individual and the Organization', (Wiley)

R.R. Blake and J.S. Moulton, 'The Managerial Grid', (The Gulf Publishing Co.)

T. Burns and G.M. Stalker,  'The Management of Innovation', (Tavistock Publications)

P.F. Drucker,  'The Practice of Management', (Heinemann)

D. John,  'Senior Staff Roles in Secondary Schools', (published in 'Trends')

E. Richardson,  'The Teacher, the School and the Task of Mangement', (Heinemann)

J. Walton (ed.),  'Curriculum organisation and design', (Ward Lock Educational)

                                                                                           

CAESAR: "DE BELLO GALLICO": BOOK IV

Introduction.


Sabidius has previously translated Books I. II, III and V of Caesar's "Gallic War"; all of these translations with their separate introductions may be found elsewhere on this blog. This, the fourth book of Caesar's commentaries on the "Gallic War", provides an account of the campaigns which Caesar fought in the year 55 B.C., that is shortly after the renewal of the First Triumvirate between Pompey , Crassus and himself, which had led to a five-year extension of his proconsular imperium. While his victories in this year were not on such a spectacular scale as in the three previous years, his twin exploits of crossing the Rhine and sailing to Britain created new precedents for the Roman army and led to great enthusiasm in Rome. 

Before either of these events, however, Caesar was confronted with the invasion of Gaul by two German tribes, the Usipites and the Tencteri. While Caesar is renowned for his policy of  clemency towards defeated enemies, he was also capable of extreme ruthlessness when he felt the circumstances necessitated it. His brutal treatment of these two tribes (see Chapters 14-15 below) is perhaps the most notorious example of this. By seizing on a relatively small breach of a truce which he had arranged with these two tribes, he detained  their chiefs who had come to his camp to sue for peace, and then, having defeated their leaderless men, he proceeded to massacre up to 400,000 men, women and children, to the extent that these tribes were virtually wiped out. This savage treatment, and the breach of faith that had allegedly preceded it, appears to have caused some concern in Rome, and indeed it is reported in Plutarch's "Life of Caesar" that his bitter personal enemy, Cato the Younger, during a debate in the Senate went so far as to suggest that Caesar should be handed over to the barbarians in order to expiate that breach of faith, and thus avoid the divine vengeance which might otherwise fall upon the Roman people. While Cato's politically motivated diatribe cut no ice with Roman public opinion, and indeed the Senate, delighted at Caesar's twin exploits of crossing the Rhine and invading Britain voted an unprecedented thanksgiving of twenty days (see Chapter 38 below), there is little doubt that Caesar's treatment of the Usipetes and the Tencteri was cruel and verging on the treacherous. This is brought out by the brief and elliptical manner in which he glosses over what actually happened (see Chapters 14-15 once more). Caesar was a past master of using his apparently neutrally phrased narrative, always couched in the impersonal third person, to show his achievements and his decisions in the best possible light from the point of view of his own reputation, but when what had happened was perhaps somewhat less than creditable his approach is not to lie outright but to abbreviate, if not to obscure, the account. In this case, unpleasant as the facts in the business of the Usipetes and the Tencteri appear to be, Caesar would probably have justified his transactions on the grounds of absolute necessity. If the Rhine was to be established as a secure Eastern boundary for Gaul, he had to stop Gallic tribes from appealing to German tribes for help and to deter Germans from wishing to come over the Rhine into Gaul. In this context there can be little doubt that Caesar's ruthless suppression of the Usipetes and the Tencteri achieved its objectives.

While the two campaigns which followed, the crossing of the Rhine and the exploratory raid into Britain, may actually have achieved little of substance, these two exploits fired the imagination of his compatriots back in Rome and created great excitement. At the same time they provided a further boost to Caesar's prestige and political influence in Rome, which was of course the principal purpose behind them. The building of a bridge to span a river as broad as the Rhine was a truly remarkable achievement in itself. That it was done in only ten days is even more astonishing. The Romans were very proud of the engineering skills of their soldiers and indeed Caesar dwells lovingly on the details of the bridge-building in Chapter 17. The technical details are a little difficult to translate, and different translations feature different interpretations, but for this translator the description is made easier to understand by the sketch of the bridge and its components on page 52 of the textbook used.

The arrival of the Romans on the soil of Britain in the late summer of 55 B.C. is of course a date of great significance for British history, because it is the first recorded interaction between Britain and the mighty empire of Rome. In some ways Caesar's two visits, this one and the longer one in the following year, were false dawns, not only because little of substance was achieved as a result of them, but because the actual conquest of Britain by the Romans under the Emperor Claudius was delayed until 43 A.D. Nevertheless it is hard to exaggerate the excitement which Caesar's two visits to the mythical and mysterious island generated in Rome - almost akin to the lunar landing by American astronauts in 1969. And generations of British schoolchildren have listened to, and drawn pictures of, the evocative scene in Chapter 26 when the standard-bearer or "aquilifer" of the Tenth Legion leaps into the waves to encourage his reluctant comrades to make it to land. While both of Caesar's exploits in this year may seem like publicity stunts, they do also illustrate something else about Caesar, namely, his belief in his "lucky star" (see his "pristinam fortunam" at the end of Chapter 26), and his willingness to take risks which other Roman generals of his age would have sought to eschew.  By this stage his troops shared in this belief and would have followed him anywhere, as they indeed did in this year, and as they continued to do so in the years ahead.

The text for this translation comes from "Caesar: Gallic War IV", edited by Clement Bryans, M.A., and published by Macmillan in the "Elementary Classics" series in 1886.  As he has done in other recent translations, Sabidius has highlighted main verbs by the use of italics, and has underlined ablative absolute phrases, which are common in this as in other of Caesar's works. Once again, Sabidius had sought to produce a translation which sticks as closely as possible to the sentence structure of the Latin text. Where it has been considered desirable to offer a slightly more colloquial rendering of certain words or phrases, the more literal version is placed in brackets thereafter.

Chapter 1.

In that winter which followed - (now) this was the year with Gnaeus Pompeius (Magnus) (and) Marcus (Licinius) Crassus (as) consuls - the German Usipetes, and likewise the Tencteri, crossed the Rhine with a great multitude of men, not far from the sea, (at the point) where the the Roman armyine flows into (it). The reason for their crossing was (the fact) that, having been thoroughly harassed by the Suebi for several years, they were being hard pressed by war and were being prevented from the cultivation of their land. The nation of the Suebi is by far the greatest and the most warlike of all the Germans. They are said to have a hundred cantons, from each of which they draw a thousand armed men every year. The rest, who have stayed at home, maintain (lit. nourish) themselves and those men; the latter in turn are again under arms in the year afterwards, (while) the former remain at home. Thus neither agriculture nor the systematic practice (lit. the theory and practice) of war is interrupted. But among them there is not any private and (therefore) separate land, nor are they allowed (lit. is it permitted [to them]) to remain in one place (for) longer than a year for the purpose of habitation. They do not live much on corn, but for the most part on milk and cattle(-meat), and they are much (engaged) in hunting (excursions); (and) this circumstance, owing to their type of food and their daily exercise and the freedom of their life, in that from boyhood, having been trained by no service or discipline, they are said to do nothing at all against their inclination, both promotes (lit. nourishes) their strength and makes (them) men of an immense size of body. And indeed they have brought themselves to such a habit that (even) in the coldest places they do not have any clothing except animal-skins, on account of the scantiness of which a great part of their body is bare, and they bathe (lit. wash [themselves]) in the rivers.

Chapter 2.

There is access to traders more on this account, that they may have (someone) to whom they can sell (those things) which they have taken in war (rather) than because they require any thing to be imported. Nay even as to draught-horses, in which the Gauls delight very greatly and which they procure at a high price, they do not employ imported (ones) but the crooked and misshapen (ones) which are born among them, (and) by daily exercise they render these to be (capable) of the greatest labour. In cavalry actions they often leap down from their horses and fight on foot, and they have trained their horses  to remain in the same spot, (and) to these they retire (lit. betake themselves) speedily, whenever there is the need; nor, in accordance with their customs, is anything considered more shameful and more indolent than to make use of saddles. Accordingly, however few (they may be), they dare to advance against (lit. to approach) any number of horsemen equipped with saddles. [They do not allow any wine to be imported to them at all, because they think that men become enervated for the purpose of hardship being endured and are made effeminate by that commodity.]

Chapter 3.

They consider their greatest glory as a nation that the land on their borders should be unoccupied to the widest extent possible: (and they think) that it is made evident by this circumstance that a great number of states cannot withstand their force. So the land on one side is said to be untenanted for about sixty miles (lit. sixty thousand paces) from (the territory of) the Suebi. On the other side, the Ubii come close up, whose state was (once) extensive and prosperous, as it is conceived among Germans, and (who) are somewhat (lit. a little) more civilised than others of the same race, on account of the fact that they border on the Rhine, and traders keep visiting them frequently and they themselves have grown accustomed to the habits of the Gauls on account of their proximity (to them). Although the Suebi, having tested them often in many wars, have not been able to drive (them) from their territory on account of the size and importance of their state, yet they have made (them) their tributaries and have reduced (them so as to be) more humble and. weak (than they have ever been).

Chapter 4. 

In the same situation (lit. case) were the Usipetes and the Tencteri, of whom we have spoken above, who, although they withstood the force of the Suebi for many years, having at last been driven from their lands and having wandered for three years in many districts of Germany, reached the Rhine. The Menapii were inhabiting these regions and were holding lands, buildings and villages on each side of the river, but, greatly alarmed at the approach of so great a host, they withdrew from those buildings which they possessed across the river, and, having placed guards at different positions on the near side of the river, prevented the Germans from crossing. Since, having tried everything, they could neither force a crossing (lit. contend with force) on account of their lack of ships, nor cross over secretly because of the Menapian sentries, they pretended to retire (lit. turn themselves back) to their own settlements and districts, and, having proceeded on a three days' journey, they returned again, and, the whole of this march having been completed by their cavalry in a single night, they caught the Menapii unaware and off-guard, who, having been informed (lit. made more certain) of the departure of the Germans by their scouts, had moved back into their villages across the Rhine without fear. These having been slain and their ships having been seized, they crossed the river before that section of the Menapii who were on the near side of the Rhine could be informed (lit. made more sure), and, all their buildings having been occupied, they maintained themselves on their supplies for the remaining part of the winter.

Chapter 5.

Having been informed of these things, and fearing the vacillation of the Gauls, because they are fickle with regard to any plans to be adopted and are generally eager for change (lit. new things), Caesar considered that nothing should (lit. [was] suitable to) be entrusted to them. For it is (a mark) of Gallic custom both to compel travellers to stop, even against their will, and to enquire what each of them has heard or has learned about every subject, and in their towns a crowd surrounds any traders and forces (them) to declare from what regions they come and what affairs they know of there. Having been disturbed by these facts and reports, they often adopt (lit. enter into) resolutions on the most important matters, which it is necessary that they repent of at once (lit. on the spot), since they are slaves to uncertain rumours and most (of the traders) give answers invented (lit. reply with fictions) at their own inclination.

Chapter 6.

This custom having been learned about, Caesar, in order that he might not encounter a more serious war, sets out for the army earlier than he was accustomed (to do). When he had arrived thither, he discovered that those things which he had suspected would happen had (already) occurred; that embassies had been sent to the Germans by some (lit. not none) of the states, and that they had been urged to withdraw from the Rhine, and that everything which they had asked for will have been got ready. Having been inspired (lit. induced) by this expectation, the Germans were ranging more widely and had arrived at the territory of the Eburones and the Condrusi, who are dependants of the Treviri. The chieftains of Gaul having been summoned, Caesar considered that those things which he had learned should (lit. were needing to) be concealed by him, and, their spirits having been calmed and encouraged, and cavalry having been ordered, he decided to wage war on (lit. with) the Germans.

Chapter 7.

A corn supply having been provided and his cavalry having been selected, he began to make a march to those places, in which locations he heard that the Germans were. When he was a few days' march away from those (places), envoys came from them, whose speech was as follows: that the Germans neither made war upon the Roman people first, but nor did they decline, if they were provoked, to (lit. but that they would) contend in arms, in that it was the custom of the Germans, handed down by their ancestors, to resist anyone who made war (upon them) and not to ask for quarter (lit. to beg off). That they said these things however, that they came (there) reluctantly, having been expelled from their home; if the Romans wanted their good-will, let them either assign them lands, or allow (them) to retain those (lands) which they had won by (force of) arms: that they yielded to the Suebi alone, to whom not even the immortal gods could be equal; that there was no one else on earth whom they could not conquer.

Chapter 8.

To these (remarks) Caesar replied as it seemed proper (to answer); but the conclusion of his speech was (as follows): that he could have (lit. there could be to him) no alliance with them, if they remained in Gaul; that it was not right that (those) who could not defend their own territories should seize (those) of others; that there were not any lands lying vacant in Gaul which could be given (away) to such an especially large horde without injury (to others); but that they might (lit. that it was permitted [to them]), if they wished, (lit. to) settle in the territories of the Ubii, whose ambassadors were with him (to) complain about the outrages of the Suebi and (to) seek help from him: (and) that he would require this from the Ubii.

Chapter 9.

The envoys said that they would report these things to their (people) and that, the matter having been deliberated on, they would return to Caesar three days later (lit. after the third day): in the meantime they asked that he should not move his camp nearer to them. Caesar said that not even that (request) could be obtained from him. For he had learned that a great part of their cavalry had been sent across the Meuse to the (lands of) the Ambivariti some days before for the purpose of plundering and foraging: he supposed that this cavalry was awaited and that the delay was interposed because of that reason.

Chapter 10.

The Meuse flows forth from the Vosges mountain (range), which is in the territory of the Lingones, and, a certain branch having been received from the Rhine, which is called the Waal, forms the island of the Batavi, and no further than eighty miles (lit. thousand paces) from the Ocean it flows into the Rhine. The Rhine, however, rises in the (land of the) Lepontii, who live in the Alps, and runs at full speed for a long distance through the territories of the Nantuates, Helvetii, Sequani, Mediomatrices, Tibuci and Treviri, and where it approached the Ocean it flows down into several branches, many large islands having been formed, a great part of which are inhabited by savage and barbarous tribes, of which there are (some) that are supposed to live on fish and birds' eggs, and flows into the Ocean by many mouths.

Chapter 11.

When Caesar was not more than twelve miles (lit. thousand paces) distant from the enemy, their envoys returned to him, as had been arranged; they, meeting (him) on the march, earnestly entreated him not to advance any further. When they could not obtain this (request), they asked him to send (word) (lit. send forward) to those cavalrymen who had gone out in front of the column and prevent them from fighting, and to give (them) the opportunity of sending envoys to the Ubii; if the chieftains and council of the latter would give them security by an oath, they indicated that they would accept those terms which might be proposed by Caesar; (and they asked that) he might give them the space of three days for these matters to be settled. Caesar thought that all these (pleas) tended to that same (end), (namely) that, a delay of three days having been interposed, their cavalry, which was absent, might return; however, he said that he would not, on that day, advance further than four miles (lit. thousand paces) for the sake of (procuring) water; (and that) as large a number (of them) as possible should assemble thither on the following day, so that he could learn about their demands. Meanwhile, he sends (word) to the commanders, who had gone forward with the whole cavalry, to tell (them) not to provoke the enemy to an engagement, and, if they were provoked themselves, (to) hold their ground, until he himself had come up nearer with the army.

Chapter 12.

But the enemy, as soon as (lit. when first) they saw our cavalry, the number of which was five thousand, whereas they had not more than eight hundred horsemen, because those who had gone across the Meuse for the purpose of foraging had not yet returned, our men being in no way fearful, because their envoys had departed from Caesar (only) a short (time) before, and that day had been requested by them for a truce, a charge having been made, had thrown our men into disorder; (our men) in turn resisting, they jumped down on to their feet, in accordance with their custom, our horses having been stabbed in the belly (lit. underneath), and several of our men having been thrown to the ground, they put the rest to flight and drove (them) into such a state of panic that they did not desist from flight until they had come in sight of our column. In that battle seventy-four of our horsemen were (lit. are) slain, among them a very brave man, Piso of Aquitania, sprung from a most distinguished line, whose grandfather had held the sovereignty in his state, (and who) had been named (as) a friend by our senate. He, when he was trying to bring help to his brother, (who had been) hemmed in by the enemy, rescued him from danger, (but) he himself, having been thrown from his wounded horse, resisted very bravely for as long as he could: when, having been surrounded, he had fallen, many wounds having been received, and his brother, who had at that time retired from the fray, had noticed this from afar, his horse having been spurred on, he flung himself upon (lit. offered himself to) the enemy and was killed.

Chapter 13. 

This engagement having occurred, Caesar considered that the envoys should no longer (lit. were no longer worthy to) be heard by him, nor should any conditions (lit. were any conditions fit to) be accepted (by him) from those who, peace having been sought, had made war unprovoked (lit. of their own accord) through treachery and ambush; he judged that it would indeed be the height of folly to wait, while the enemy's forces should be increased and their cavalry should return, and, the fickleness of the Gauls having been appreciated, he felt how much weight the enemy had acquired in their minds from a single engagement; (and so) he concluded that no opportunity should be given to them for the purpose of plans being adopted. These things having been determined, and his plans having been shared with his legates and his quaestor, so that that he should not let pass any chance of a battle (lit. any battle-day), an event occurred very fortuitously, (namely) that on the morning of the day after that day, practising the same deceit and dissimulation, a large body of Germans, all the chieftains and the senior men in point of birth having been included, came to him in his camp, partly, as it was asserted, for the sake of themselves being exculpated, in that they had joined battle on the previous day contrary to what had been agreed and (to what) they themselves had requested, (and) partly to obtain whatever they could by deception in way of the truce. Having been delighted that they had come into his power (lit. had been offered to him), he ordered that they should be detained, (and) he himself led all his forces out of the camp, and commanded the cavalry, which he thought to have been intimidated by the recent engagement, to follow in the rear of the column.

Chapter 14.

A triple line having been formed, and a march of eight miles having been quickly accomplished, he arrived at the enemy's camp before the Germans could perceive what was being done. Having been suddenly panic-stricken by all the circumstances, both by the speed of our arrival and the departure of their (leaders), the opportunity having been afforded neither for a plan to be adopted nor for arms to be taken up, they were  thrown into doubt as to whether it was better to lead their forces against the enemy, or to defend their camp, or to seek safety in flight. When their consternation was indicated by their uproar and tumult, our soldiers, enraged by the treachery of the previous day, burst into their camp. In this place (those) who could quickly take up their arms resisted our men for a short while and joined battle amongst their carts and baggage-wagons; but the rest of the horde, (consisting) of children and women [for they had left their homes and crossed the Rhine with all their (families)] began to flee in all directions; Caesar sent his cavalry with the purpose of them being pursued.

Chapter 15.

The Germans, a noise having been heard behind their backs, when they saw that their (families) were being slain, their arms having been thrown away and their war-standards having been abandoned, rushed wildly (lit. flung themselves) out of their camp, and, when they had arrived at the confluence of the Meuse and the Rhine, further flight having been despaired of, (and) a great number having been killed, the survivors threw themselves headlong into the river and there perished, overcome by fear, fatigue (and) the force of the stream. Our men, all unharmed to a single (man), with very few having been wounded, (and freed) from the dread of a great war, since the number of the enemy had been four hundred and thirty thousand souls, retired (lit. betook themselves) to their camp. Caesar gave the opportunity of departing to those who had been retained in the camp. They, fearing punishments and tortures (at the hands) of the Gauls, whose lands they had ravaged (lit. harassed) said that they wished to remain with him. Caesar gave them the freedom (to do so).

THE CROSSING OF THE RHINE (Chapters 16-19)

Chapter 16.

The war with the Germans having been finished, Caesar decided, for many reasons, that he should cross the Rhine (lit. that the Rhine was needing to be crossed by him); of these the most weighty was that (fact) that, since he saw the Germans so easily induced to go into Gaul, he wanted them to have fears for their own possessions as well, when they understood that the army of the Roman people both could and dared to cross the Rhine. And besides (lit. it was also added that) that section of the cavalry of the Usipetes and the Tencteri which, (as) I have mentioned above, had crossed the Meuse for the sake of plundering and foraging, and had not taken part in the battle, after the rout of their countrymen had withdrawn (lit. had betaken themselves) across the Rhine into the territory of the Sugambri, and had joined themselves together with them. When Caesar had sent messengers to them to demand that they should hand over to him (those) who had made war on him and on Gaul, they replied (as follows): that the Rhine was the boundary of the empire of the Roman people: if he thought (it was) unjust for the Germans to go into Gaul without his consent (lit. with him [being] unwilling), why did he claim that anything across the Rhine was under his dominion or power? The Ubii, on the other hand, who alone out of all those people living across the Rhine had sent ambassadors to Caesar, (and) had made an alliance and given hostages, earnestly entreated (him) to bring them assistance, because they were being grievously oppressed by the Suebi; or, if he were prevented from doing this by affairs of state, at least (lit. only) to transport his army across the Rhine: (they said) that that would be sufficient for their assistance and (their) hope for the future (lit. subsequent time). That the name and the reputation of his army was so great, even with regard to the remotest tribes of the Germans, Ariovistus having been defeated and this most recent battle having occurred, that they could be secure under the fame and friendship of the Roman people. They promised a large supply of boats for the purpose of the army being transported.

Chapter 17.

For those reasons which I have mentioned, Caesar had resolved to cross the Rhine; but he thought that it was not sufficiently safe, and he judged that it was not (a reflection) of his own dignity or (that) of the Roman people, to cross by boats. Therefore, although the very great difficulty of a bridge being constructed was presented (to him), on account of the width, the fast current (lit. the rapidity), and the depth of the river, yet he considered that he should attempt to do this (lit. that it was needing to be attempted by him) or, otherwise, that he should not lead the army across (lit. that the army was not due to be led across). He coupled together (lit. between themselves) at a distance of two feet pairs of beams a foot and a half (thick), sharpened a little at the base (and in length) measured in proportion to the depth of the river. When he had fixed these things, (which had been) lowered into the river by means of derricks, he had (them) driven home with pile-drivers, not vertically (lit. straight at the perpendicular) in the manner of a pile, but slanting forwards and sloping, so that they inclined in accordance with the flow (lit. natural tendency) of the stream, (and) opposite to these he also placed two (beams), coupled in the same manner, at a distance of forty feet from the base (of each), directed (lit. turned) against the force and current (lit. onrush) of the river. Both of these (pairs) were kept apart by timbers two feet (thick), inserted from above, as far as (the distance between) the joining of these beams (lit. as far as the joining of these beams was apart), with a pair of clamps at the extremities at each end; these (beams) having been kept apart and secured in opposite directions, so great was the strength of the work, and such (was) the arrangement of the structure, that the greater the force of the water (that) rushed down (lit. spurred itself on), the more tightly (the beams which had been) fastened held together. These (trestles) were protected by timber laid down lengthwise and covered over with saplings (lit. long poles) and fascines (i.e. faggots of brushwood); and in addition (lit. notwithstanding [that]) piles were also driven in aslant on the side of the river, placed underneath as a buttress and connected with the whole structure (lit. work), in order to withstand the force of the river, and likewise other (piles) (were driven in) a little distance above the bridge, so that, if the trunks of trees, or if boats, were despatched by the barbarians for the purpose of the work being broken down, the force of such things might be reduced, and that they might not harm the bridge.

Chapter 18.

Within ten days (from the time) in which the timber had begun to be collected, the whole work having been completed, the army is taken across. A strong guard having been left at each end of the bridge, Caesar hastens into the territory of the Sugambri. In the meantime, ambassadors come to him from several states; to these seeking peace and an alliance, he replies in a generous manner, and orders hostages to be brought to him. (But) the Sugambri, from that (very) time at which the bridge was begun to be built, flight having been prepared, with those, whom they had among them from the Tencteri and Usipetes encouraging (this), had quitted their territory, and had carried away all their (possessions) and hid themselves in remote fastnesses and forests.

Chapter 19.

Having stayed in their territory for a few days, all their villages and houses having been burned and their corn having been cut, Caesar proceeded (betook himself) into the territory of the Ubii, and, having promised (that he would give) them help if they were hard pressed by the Suebi, he learned these things from them: that the Suebi, after they had discovered that a bridge was being built, a council having been held in accordance with their custom, had despatched messengers (telling the people) to evacuate their towns, (and) lodge their  children, wives and all their (possessions) in the forests, and that all who could bear arms were to gather in one place; that this had been chosen (in) about the middle of those districts which the Suebi held: that here they were awaiting the arrival of the Romans and had determined to fight it out on this spot. When Caesar discovered this, all those things having been accomplished, for the purpose of which he had determined to lead his army across, (namely) to strike terror into the Germans, to take vengeance on the Sugambri, (and) to free the Ubii from their blockade, eighteen days altogether having been spent across the Rhine, (and) thinking that enough (had been) accomplished, both for the purpose of renown and for the purpose of expediency, he withdrew (lit. betook himself) to Gaul, and broke down the bridge.

FIRST INVASION OF BRITAIN (Chapters 20-36)

Chapter 20.

With (only) a small part of the summer having been left, yet Caesar, although in these regions, because all of Gaul looks towards the north (lit. the seven plough-oxen), winters are early, was intent upon setting out for Britain, because he understood that in almost all his campaigns against the Gauls assistance had been supplied to our enemies from there, and he considered that, (even) if the time of year should be insufficient for the purpose of war, still it would be of great service to him, if he had at least (lit. only) visited the island, and had observed the character of the people, and had learned about the localities, the harbours and the landing-grounds; (for) almost all of these things were unknown to the Gauls. For no one hardly ever went to that (place) except traders, nor even to them was any (part of it) known except the sea-coast and those districts opposite Gaul. Therefore, traders from all parts having been called to him, he could discover neither how great was the size of the island, nor what or how many tribes inhabited (it), nor what degree of skill in war (lit. what practice of war) they possessed or what customs they observed (lit. employed), nor what harbours were suitable for a great number of large ships.

Chapter 21.

For the purpose of these matters being known, before he were to make the attempt, thinking Gaius Volusenus to be suitable (for this), he sends (him) forward with a war-ship. He commissions him, all these things having been explored, to return to him as soon as possible. He himself with all his forces sets out for the (country of the) Morini, because from there was the shortest crossing to Britain. He commands ships from all parts of the neighbouring districts and the fleet, which he had built the previous summer for the war against the Veneti, to assemble in this place. In the meantime, his purpose having been discovered and having been reported to the Britons by traders, envoys from several of the island's states come to him to promise that they will give hostages and submit to the authority of the Roman people. These (envoys) having been heard, he, making promises generously and encouraging (them) to remain in that frame of mind, sends them back home, and together with them he sends Commius, whom, the Atrebates having been conquered, he had appointed (as) king there, (a man) whose courage and counsel he approved of, and whose influence was highly esteemed in these regions. He orders him (to) visit (as many) states as he can and encourage (them) to accept the protection of the Roman people. Volusenus, all districts having been observed, as far as the opportunity could be afforded to him, since he did not dare to leave his ship and entrust himself to barbarians, returns to Caesar on the fifth day and reports what things he had observed there.

Chapter 22.

While Caesar remains in these places for the sake of ships being procured, envoys came to him from a large section of the Morini to apologise (lit. to excuse themselves) for their policy in the previous season, because, (being) barbarian people and (thus) unacquainted with our way of life, they had made war upon the Roman people, and (to) promise that they would do those things which he should command. Caesar, thinking that this (overture) had occurred quite opportunely for him, because he neither wished  to have an enemy behind  his back, nor did he have the chance of war being waged on account of the time of year, and he did not consider that this business of such trivial matters should be preferred to (lit. should be set before) (his expedition) to Britain, orders them (to provide) a large number of hostages. These having been brought to (him), he receives them into his protection. About eighty transport ships having been collected and concentrated (lit. drawn together), which (amount) he considered would be enough for two legions to be transported, he assigned what war-ships he had in addition to his quaestor, his legates and his commanders. To this were added eighteen transport ships, which were detained by wind eight miles (lit. thousand paces) off from that place from being able to come to the same port: these he assigned to the cavalry. The rest of the army he gave to his legates Quintus Titurius Sabinus and Lucius Aurunculeius Cotta, to be led against the Menapii and against those cantons of the Morini, from whom no envoys had come to him; he ordered his legate Publius Sulpicius Rufus to hold the port with such a garrison as he considered would be sufficient.

Chapter 23.

These things having been arranged, (and) having obtained weather suitable for sailing, he weighed anchor (lit. loosed [his anchor]) at about the third watch, and ordered the cavalry to proceed to the further harbour and embark (lit. mount their ships) and follow him. Since (this) was carried out somewhat (lit. a little) tardily by them, he himself reached Britain with the first ships at about the fourth hour of the day, and there he beheld the forces of the enemy displayed in arms on all the hills. The nature of this place was such, and the sea was so hemmed in by steep cliffs, that a missile could be hurled from the higher ground on to the shore. Thinking this place by no means suitable for disembarking, he waited at anchor till the ninth hour, while the rest of the ships assembled there. In the meantime, the legates and military tribunes having been called together, he both pointed out what he had learned from Volusenus and what he wished to be done, and he warned, as the tactics of military matters (and) especially the affairs of the sea require, inasmuch as these things have a swift and uncertain movement, (that) all things should be performed by them at his nod and at once (lit. at the time). These having been dismissed (to their posts), (and) having obtained both a favourable wind and tide at the same (lit. the one) time, the signal having been given and his anchor having been weighed (lit. raised), advancing about seven miles (lit. thousand paces) from that place, he brought in his ships, the shore (being) open and level.

Chapter 24.

But the barbarians, the Romans' purpose having been understood, their cavalry and their charioteers, which kind (of warrior) they are accustomed to use in battles, having been sent forward, (and) following up with the rest of their forces, sought to prevent our (men) from disembarking from their ships. (In this) there was the greatest difficulty because of these reasons, (namely) that, on account of their size, our ships could not be grounded except in deep (water), while for our soldiers, the places (being) unknown (to them), with their hands encumbered (and) [having been oppressed] by the great and heavy burden of their armour, it was necessary at one and the same time both to leap down from the ships, and to stand firm in the waves, and to engage the enemy, whereas they, either from dry (ground) or advancing a little into the water, with their limbs free, (and) the places (being) well-known (to them), could hurl their missiles boldly and spur on their horses (which were) accustomed (to this). Dismayed by these circumstances, and altogether unskilled in this kind of  fighting, our (men) did not employ the same vigour and zeal, which they were accustomed to exert in battles on land.

Chapter 25.

When Caesar noticed this, he ordered the war-ships, the appearance of which was both rather strange to the barbarians and the movement (of which) was more ready to suit the occasion, to be withdrawn a little from the transport ships, and to be propelled by their oars and to be positioned alongside the enemy's exposed flank, and that the enemy should be driven off and dislodged from there; this plan was of great service to our (men). For the barbarians, disturbed by the shape of our ships and by the motion of our oars and also by the unfamiliar nature of our artillery-machines, halted and retreated (lit. carried back their feet), (if) only a little. And, with our soldiers hesitating, chiefly on account of the depth of the sea, (the man) who was carrying the eagle of the tenth legion, appealing to the gods that this action should turn out happily for the legion, said, "Jump down, soldiers, unless you wish to betray your eagle to the enemy: I, at any rate, shall have done my duty to the republic and to my commander." When he had said this with a loud voice, he threw himself forth from the ship.Then our (men), exhorting one another (lit. between themselves) that so great a disgrace should not be permitted, leapt down from the ship in one body. Likewise, when (the men) from the nearest ships saw them, following (them) up, they approached the enemy.

Chapter 26.

There was fierce fighting (lit. it was fought fiercely) on both sides. Our (men), however, as they could neither preserve their ranks nor get a firm foothold (lit. stand on [the ground] firmly) nor follow their standards, and, (as) one (man) from (one) ship (and another) from another attached himself to whatever standard he met, they were thrown into great disorder; but the enemy, all the shallows having been known (to them), when they saw from the shore some soldiers scattered and disembarking from a ship, their horses at the gallop (lit. having been spurred on), attacked (them while they were) encumbered, many surrounded a few, (and) others hurled  missiles at  the whole body (of our men) on their exposed flank. When Caesar noticed this, he ordered the skiffs of the war-ships (and) also the reconnaissance boats to be filled with soldiers, and, whomsoever he saw in distress, he sent help to them. Our (men), as soon as they were standing on dry (land), made a charge against the enemy, all their (comrades) following (them), and put them to flight, but they could not pursue (them) very far, because the cavalry had not been able to hold their course and make the island. This one thing was wanting to Caesar to complete his previous good fortune.

Chapter 27.

The enemy having been overcome, as soon as they had recovered (lit. withdrawn themselves) from their flight, at once sent envoys to Caesar to sue for (lit. [to talk] about) peace; they promised that (they) would give hostages and would do whatever he should require. Together with these envoys came Commius the Atrebatian, whom (as) I have shown above, (had been) sent ahead into Britain by Caesar. They had seized him (when) disembarking from his ship, although he was bearing Caesar's commissions in the capacity of an ambassador, and had thrown (him) into chains; then, the battle having taken place, they sent (him) back. With regard to the peace being sought, they cast the blame for that action upon the mass of the people, and asked that they might be pardoned on account of their ignorance. Caesar, having complained that, although, envoys having been sent to the continent voluntarily, they had sought peace from him, they had made war (upon him) without cause, said that he was pardoning their ignorance and that he required hostages; some of these they gave immediately, (and) they said that they would give the others in a few days (after they had been) summoned from more distant places. In the meantime, they ordered their (people) to move back to their fields, and chieftains began to assemble from all parts and to entrust themselves and their states to Caesar.

Chapter 28.  A storm upsets Caesar's plan.

Peace having been established by these measures, on the fourth day after their arrival (lit. it was arrived) in Britain, the eighteen ships, concerning which there has been an explanation (lit. it has been explained) above,    which had taken the cavalry on board, set sail (lit. loosed [their anchors]) from the upper port in a gentle breeze. When they were approaching Britain and could be (lit. were being) seen from the camp, so great a storm suddenly arose that not one (of them) could hold their course, but some were carried back to the same (place) from where they had set out, (while) others were driven down to the lower part of the island, which is nearer (to) the west (lit. the setting of the sun), with great danger to themselves; they, however, after they had dropped anchor (lit. their anchors having been dropped), when they began to be filled with waves, sailing out into the deep (sea) of necessity on a foul night, made for the continent.

Chapter 29.  Some ships destroyed.

On the same night it happened that there was a full moon, which day (of the month) is accustomed to produce very high sea tides in the ocean, and that was unknown to our (men). So, at one (and the same) time both the tide had filled the war-ships, in which Caesar had seen to his army being transported and which he had drawn up on to dry (land), and the storm was battering the transport (ships) which were riding at anchor (lit. which had been fastened to anchors), nor was any opportunity afforded our (men) either for managing or for helping (them). Several ships having been wrecked, since the remainder, their cables, their anchors and the rest of their tackle having been lost, were unfit for sailing, great consternation, a thing which was bound to happen, was caused throughout the whole army. For there were no other ships (available) so that they could be conveyed back by them, and all things which were of service for ships being repaired were lacking, and, because it was known to everyone that they were due to winter in Gaul, corn had not been provided in those places for the winter.

Chapter 30.  British chiefs take advantage of the confusion.

These things having been found out, the chieftains of Britain, who had gathered together at Caesar's (headquarters), conversing among themselves, since they were becoming aware that cavalry and ships and corn were wanting to the Romans, and were discovering the small number of our soldiers from the smallness of the camp, which was even more compact for this reason, because Caesar had conveyed the legions across without their baggage, thought that it was the best course of action (lit. the best thing in the doing), a rebellion having been made, to cut our (men) off from corn and supplies and to prolong the campaign into the winter, because they were confident that, them having been defeated, or their return having been prevented, no one would afterwards cross over into Britain. And so, a conspiracy having been formed once more, they began, little by little to depart from the camp and to draw in their (men) secretly from the fields.

Chapter 31.  Remedial action by Caesar. 

But, although he had not yet discovered their plans, yet both from the fate (lit. outcome) of his ships and from that (very fact) that they had stopped giving hostages, Caesar began to suspect that it would turn out (lit. be) as it (actually) happened. He therefore began to acquire the resources to meet all eventualities. For he both brought corn from the fields into the camp daily, and he used the timber and bronze of those ships which had been most seriously damaged for the purpose of the others being repaired, and he ordered (those things) which were of use for those (purposes) to be brought from the continent. And so, since the task (lit. it) was carried out by the soldiers with the greatest zeal, although twelve ships had been lost (lit. twelve ships having been lost), he brought it about that it was reasonably possible to sail in the rest (lit. for the rest to be sailed).

Chapter 32.  Ambushed in the field.

While these things were being done, one legion, which was called the Seventh, having been sent, as usual (lit. in accordance with custom) to gather corn, and no (lit. not any) suspicion of war having as yet (lit. at that time) arisen (lit. been interposed), since some of the people remained in the fields and others even kept returning from time to time to the camp, those who were on guard-duty in front of the gates of the camp reported to Caesar that a larger dust-cloud than usual (lit. than custom admitted of) could be seen in that direction into which area the legion had made its march. Caesar, suspecting what (lit. that which) was (happening), (namely) that something of a new plan had been adopted (lit. entered into) by the barbarians, ordered the cohorts which were at the guard-posts to set out with him in that direction, two of the remaining cohorts to take their place on guard, (and) the rest to be armed and to follow him closely at once. When he had advanced a little further from the camp, he noticed that his (men) were being hard-pressed by the enemy and were (only) holding their ground with difficulty, and that, the legion (being) closely packed, missiles were being hurled at (it) from all sides. For, because one area was left, all the corn from the other areas having been reaped, the enemy, suspecting that our (men) would be coming hither, had lain in wait in the woods during the night; then, attacking (them) suddenly (while they were) scattered, their arms having been put down, (and) occupied in reaping, a few having been killed, they had thrown the rest into confusion, their ranks having been broken, and at the same time had surrounded (them) with cavalry and chariots.

Chapter 33.  Chariot-fighting.

Their manner of fighting from their chariots is this. Firstly, they drive about in all directions, and hurl their missiles, and generally throw (the enemy's) ranks into confusion through the very dread of their horses and the noise of their wheels, and, when they have penetrated (lit. threaded themselves in between) the squadrons of cavalry, they jump down from their horses and fight on foot. Meanwhile, the charioteers gradually retire from the battle, and position their chariots in such a way, that, if the fighters (lit. they) are hard-pressed by the number of the enemy, they may have a ready retreat to their own (side). Thus, they display in battle the mobility of cavalry and the stability of infantry, and by daily practice and training they achieve so much that they are accustomed to check their galloping horses (lit. horses [which have been] spurred on) (even) in a sloping and steep location, and to guide and turn (them) in an instant (lit. in a short [time]), and (then) to run along the pole and stand on the yoke, and thence to return (lit. betake themselves) very quickly into their chariots.

Chapter 34.  A lull in the fighting.

Owing to these circumstances, to our (men who had been) thrown into confusion by the new form of fighting Caesar brought help at a most opportune time: for indeed upon his arrival, the enemy halted, (and) our (men)  recovered (lit. betook themselves) from their fear. This having been done, thinking that the time was disadvantageous for provoking (the enemy) and for battle being joined, he remained (lit. kept himself) on his own ground, and after a short time (lit. a short time having been allowed to pass) he led the legions back to the camp. While these things were being done, with all our (men) (being) busy (lit. having been occupied), the remaining (Britons), who were in the fields, departed. Storms followed for several successive days, such that they both confined our (men) to camp and prevented the enemy from fighting. Meanwhile, the barbarians sent out messengers to all parts, and proclaimed to their (people) the small number of our soldiers, and pointed out how great an opportunity was being given of booty being obtained and of themselves being liberated forever (lit. in perpetuity), if they should (only) have driven the Romans from their camp. By these means a large number of infantry and cavalry having been gathered speedily together, they came up to the camp.

Chapter 35.  The enemy routed.

Although Caesar saw that the same thing would occur (lit. would be) that had happened on previous days, (namely) that, if the enemy were driven back, they would escape danger due to their speed, yet, having obtained about thirty horsemen, whom Commius the Atrebatian, who has been mentioned (lit. concerning whom it has been told) before, had brought over with himself, he formed the legions in battle-formation before the camp. Battle having been joined, the enemy were not able to bear the onslaught of our soldiers for long, and fled (lit. turned their backs [in flight]). Pursuing them as far as their speed and strength would allow (lit. by as much ground as they could achieve by running and strength), (the Romans) slew several of them, (and) then, all the farm-buildings far and wide having been set on fire, they returned (lit. betook themselves) to camp.

Chapter 36.  Peace and return to Gaul.

On the same day envoys sent by the enemy came to Caesar to sue for (lit. [to talk] about) peace. (In reply) to them Caesar doubled the number of hostages which he had previously demanded, and ordered that they should be brought to the continent, because, with the day of the equinox (being) near, he did not consider, his ships (being) damaged, that his sailing should (lit. was fit to) be exposed (lit. subjected) to the winter. Obtaining suitable weather, he set sail (lit. untied his ships) himself a little after mid-night; all of these (ships) reached the continent intact; but, of these, two transport ships, which could not make the same ports which the others (did), were carried a little further down (the coast).

Chapter 37.

When about three hundred soldiers had been disembarked from these ships, and were marching to the camp, the Morini, whom Caesar, (when) setting out for Britain, had left pacified, induced by the hope of plunder, at first surrounded (them) with a not so very large number of their (men) and ordered (them), if they did not wish that they should be killed, to lay down their arms. When they, a circle having been formed, sought to defend themselves, about six thousand men assembled swiftly at a shout. This circumstance having been reported (to him), Caesar sent all the cavalry from the camp as help to his (men). In the meantime, our soldiers withstood the enemy's attack and fought most valiantly for more than four hours, and, with (only) a few wounds having been received (by them), slew several of them. But as soon as (lit. after) our cavalry came into sight, the enemy, their arms having been thrown down, fled (lit. turned their backs [in flight]) and a great number of them were killed.

Chapter 38.

On the following day, Caesar sent his legate Titus (Atius) Labienus with those legions which he had brought back from Britain against the Morini, who had made a rebellion. They, since they did not have (anywhere) in which they could retreat (lit. betake themselves) on account of the dry state of the marshes, which they had used (as) a place of refuge the previous year, almost all came into the power of Labienus. On the other hand, the legates Quintus Titurius (Sabinus) and Lucius (Aurunculeius) Cotta, who had led their legions into the territory of the Menapii, all their lands having been laid waste, their corn having been cut (and) their buildings having been burned, returned (lit. betook themselves) to Caesar because the Menapii had concealed themselves in their thickest woods. Caesar established the winter-quarters of all the legions in (the lands of) the Belgae. Thither only two states (lit. two states in all) sent hostages from Britain, (and) the rest omitted (to do this). These things having been achieved, on receipt of Caesar's despatches, a (public) thanksgiving of twenty days was decreed by the Senate.

MANAGING THE EDUCATION OF GIFTED CHILDREN

A Project Report submitted by Andrew William Panton, M.A., Dip.Ed. in partial fulfilment of the requirements of the Diploma of Education Management of Bristol Polytechnic, September 1977.

SUMMARY OF PROJECT REPORT

MANAGING THE EDUCATION OF GIFTED CHILDREN

The importance of developing the potential of gifted children is explained; human resources are our most vital  national asset.

The present arrangement for gifted pupils are analysed, and it is seen that many LEAs and teachers either deny or ignore the existence of the problem. Consequently few arrangements are made either to identify gifted children or to provide special facilities for them.

Giftedness is then carefully defined. The designation is considered appropriate to children with a high level of general intelligence, but also to those who are talented in specific areas.

The various procedures for recognising gifted children are analysed. It is suggested that scores on intelligence tests and the systematic observation of teachers are the most important factors in accurate identification, while group intelligence tests are seen to have considerable value as a screening technique.

The needs of gifted children are considered briefly. They should receive challenging work and pass rapidly through the elementary stages of a subject. They need contact with both children of a similar ability and  average children.

Different ways of providing for the needs of gifted children are outlined; these are classified under the headings of segregation - total and partial - , acceleration, and enrichment. The advantages of selective secondary schooling are discussed, but political objectives to them are strong. Streaming is considered valuable in secondary schools but not in primary ones. Different types of partial segregation and acceleration are discussed and some are recommended, and enrichment methods are considered especially appropriate to primary education. The setting up of experimental schools for the exceptionally gifted is tentatively suggested. Finally, the suitability, for the gifted, of the traditional system of secondary selection is reiterated.

CONTENTS:

Objectives of the report.

Boundaries of the report.

Note on Evaluation.

Introduction: the need to develop giftedness.

A. Analysis of the existing situation.
 
   1. The lack of concern for the needs of  gifted children.
 
   2. The failure to identify gifted children.
 
   3. The failure to provide for the special educational needs of gifted children.

B. Areas of management decision.
 
   1. Defining giftedness.
           a. Outstanding in what kind of group?
           b. Outstanding in what particular activity?
           c. Location as evidenced in what upper proportion of the designated group?
           Conclusion.

  2. Recognising the gifted child.
          a. Intelligence tests.
          b. Special aptitude tests.
          c. School achievement.
          d. Creativity tests.  
          e. Teacher nomination.
          f.  Parental information.
          g. Personality tests.
          Conclusion.

3. Identifying the educational needs of the gifted child.

4. Making appropriate provision for the gifted child.
         Criteria.
         a. Total segregation.
         b. Partial segregation.
         c. Acceleration.
         d. Enrichment.
         Conclusion.

Footnotes.

Bibliography.

Appendices.
     1. Provision by LEAs.
     2. The incidence of giftedness.
     3. Threshold interrelationships.
     4. The indicators of giftedness.
     5. Gifted children: a teachers checklist (of characteristics).
     6. Parental questinonnaire concerning gifted children.
     7. Efficiency and effectiveness of screening procedures.      

OBJECTIVES OF THE REPORT

By reading this report, the educational manager should be able to:

1. understand the need to develop giftedness;
2. evaluate the present provision for the problems of giftedness;
3. define giftedness;
4. recognise the gifted child;
5. identify the needs of the gifted child; and
6. plan appropriate provision for the needs of the gifted child.

BOUNDARIES OF THE REPORT

The report is concerned with the management of gifted pupils in the schools of the British state sector of education. Although details of practices in other countries are included, their application is to Brit geish schools and their pupils. The methods which might be used to teach gifted pupils, and the problems involved in their general upbringing is outside the scope of the report.

NOTE ON EVALUATION

Evaluation of this report would partly depend upon the extent to which its readers are persuaded of the need to provide special facilities for gifted pupils. The recommendations, if implemented could, and should, be evaluated carefully. Identification procedures could be assessed by a study of the future academic achievements of pupils identified as gifted, and by a comparison of their achievements with those of pupils not so identified. Special provision should be evaluated by comparing the results of gifted pupils for whom such provision is made with the results of control groups of similarly gifted pupils for whom provision is not made. The value of different types of provision could also be assessed by comparing pupils' progress.In all cases, evaluation could be short-term and/or long-term, and a cost/benefit analysis, as well as an assessment of absolute values, should be attempted.

INTRODUCTION: THE NEED TO DEVELOP GIFTEDNESS

The development and utilisation of a nation's human resources are the essential ingredients both of economic prosperity and of social advance. This principle was recognised over 2,000 years ago by Plato, who observed, in his "Republic", that the state's gifted leaders are its foremost asset. They are the agents of economic and social progress; without the contributions of great minds, the ideas of original thinkers, whose innovations and creative ideas advance the frontiers of knowledge, such progress could not occur. In the thermonuclear age of the twentieth century, inventive minds with an array of scientific tools can accomplish almost anything within the scope of man's imagination, and must grapple with the problems which an expanding population and a decline in traditional resources of food and energy must inevitably create. At the judging and decision-making level in government and industry, and in all aspects of social life, a vast pool of intellect is required with the skills, training and personality to provide the necessary leadership. The development of society's human potential is of even greater importance than the acquisition and conservation of those resources of energy, raw material and food, on which so much of the emphasis of modern government focusses.

The first and foremost duty of an educationalist in a democratic society is no doubt to do his best for the mass of the population, who, of course, comprise ordinary mortals of average ability. It is generally felt that the next obligation is to provide remedial care for the subnormal and handicapped, but it is less readily accepted that particular provision should also be made for unusually gifted children, despite the obvious fact that the latter are likely to make far more valuable contributions to the good of society in the future, when they become the scientists, managers and teachers of the next generation. No amount of political dogma or sentiment should be allowed to obscure this point. For, as the late Sir Cyril Burt remarked in a celebrated passage:

   "In spite of popular prejudice there is, or there should be, no insuperable conflict between equality as a  principle of justice and inequality as a fact of genetics. In education, equal opportunity means the equal opportunity to make the most of differences that are innate. The ideal is a free and fair chance for each individual, not to rise to the same rank in life as everyone else, but to develop the peculiar gifts and virtues with which he is endowed - high ability, if he possesses it; if not, whatever qualities of body, mind and character are latent within him. In this way, and this way alone, can we be sure of realising to the full our untapped resources of talent, and warding off the decline and fall that has in the end overtaken each of the great civilisations of the past" (See Footnote 1).


A.  ANALYSIS OF THE EXISTING SITUATION

1.  The lack of concern for the needs of gifted children.

Although it is a democratic right of the gifted child that his potential for his own self-fulfilment as an individual should be developed, and it is very much in the national interest that this should be done, there is in this country a disquieting lack of concern about the needs of the gifted child. This lack of concern manifests itself both in a failure to recognise that these children have special educational needs, and by a paucity of provision for them.

Until recently, great attention has been paid to the needs of pupils of moderately high ability, that is pupils of  a grammar school type. By means of scholarships, selective transfer to various types of secondary school, and selective classification within the schools, some degree of special educational provision was made from the age of eleven onwards. However, even in the grammar school era little or no attention was paid to the exceptionally able, i.e. children whose abilities were as much above the average grammar school pupil, as the  abilities of the average grammar school pupil were above those of the general population. This neglect was the result partly of a failure to comprehend just how intelligent the gifted pupils are, and partly of an underestimation of the frequency with which they occur in the population (See Footnote 2). If the selective system of secondary education was insensitive to the needs of gifted children, the recent movement towards comprehensive schools has not served to remedy the situation. When the overall organisation of schooling is so politically controversial one cannot expect the special needs of a tiny, albeit an important, minority to receive much attention. Furthermore, the frankly anti-elitist ethos of many comprehensive schools has encouraged them to avoid the issue of provision for the extra-bright pupil, and in other comprehensives, problems of indiscipline, vandalism and truancy have given senior staff little time to consider the question.

Indeed, the main barrier to the provision of adequate educational facilities for the gifted has been the indifferent attitude of local education authorities and teachers. Some education authorities make little or no provision for their more gifted children because they either fail to recognise, or else deny, the need to do so. Sensitive to the preoccupations of local politics, they have tended to assert that their relatively restricted resources should be used mainly for the average and below average children. This attitude is reflected in correspondence addressed to Dr. E.Ogilvie, who carried out in 1970-1 a study of the teaching of gifted children in primary schools on behalf of the Schools Council (See Footnote 3). Here are some examples of the comments received by Ogilvie from local authorities and headteachers:

   "As a small authority we very rarely seem to be faced with the problem of educating the gifted primary school child and indeed I do not recall any problem which has arisen in this way for the past twenty years."

   "In this area teachers' study groups are not likely to be welcome in order to study gifted children ... teachers would feel that they had other more pressing problems."

    "The education of gifted children seems to be an area where opinions are often subjective and on balance we feel there is little to be said for discriminating in their favour ... [there is] a large proportion of socially deprived children .... and the devising of appropriate educational stimuli for this large group is a much more pressing problem for us."

This reluctance to consider gifted children as a special category requiring separate provision, which the above comments clearly illustrate, emerges again in the recent Government report on gifted children in middle and comprehensive schools. (See Footnote 4). Some of the 130 schools inspected had no wish to identify, or even to consider, special ability among their pupils. "Paradoxically, the staff were not averse to the recognition of a remedial category which was segregated for special treatment, nor to the thesis that individual needs should be identified and provided for." The "strong reluctance" to identify special ability found at many of the schools investigated by the inspectors who compiled the Report often reflected some preconceptions on the part of teachers. "We don't want a jet-set here", was how some expressed themselves. "We've only just come from a selective system", was another oft-encountered statement.

Other schools were indifferent rather than hostile to the concept of separate educational provision for the gifted. "In 'difficult' schools where vandalism, truancy, and classroom control were matters of high concern, the discussion of giftedness might be regarded as a very low priority," says the Report. Another view commonly encountered by the inspectors was that there is no need to make special provision for gifted pupils, since "they can quite well look after themselves". Teachers, it was thought, should concentrate their attention on those at the other end of the scale who find difficulty with their work.

A third group of schools showed neither hostility nor indifference, but had simply not even considered the question. "Heads and teachers manifested great uncertainty about what constituted giftedness and a great reluctance to identify any of their pupils as possessing it."

Further difficulties stem from the attitude of many parents, and even of the children themselves. A further handicap to gifted children is that society tends to be suspicious of the child that is "different", and prefers the child who is well-adjusted socially and emotionally, and who has interests conventional to his or her age and sex to the child who is academically distinguished. Parents of gifted children are very often not of superior intelligence themselves and find precocity very difficulty to handle; the same is true of teachers as well. Not only do most parents and teachers tend to mould children towards conventionality; the peer-group exerts an even more compelling influence towards uniformity in speech, manner and dress. Brighter pupils do not necessarily have the strength of character to oppose these stereotypes, and are apt to conceal their abilities and intellectual interests so as not to seem too different from other children. Sydney Bridges in eight years of experimental work with gifted children (See Footnote 5) found that the majority of them were modest about their ability. They easily accept that school work is too easy for them, and, in fulfilment of the expectations of their teachers, are content  to obtain high marks and praise for work which presents them will little challenge. It is, perhaps, just as important that the attitudes of these children should be changed as those of the parents and teachers responsible for their upbringing.

2.  The failure to identify gifted children.

The identification of gifted children is a process dogged by difficulties of defining just what giftedness is. Associated with the problem of definition is that of agreeing on suitable criteria for determining who the gifted  children are. From the little evidence that is available there is little to substantiate the perception that these children emerge naturally and can look after themselves. In an enquiry conducted by Pegnato and Birch in the junior division of a high school in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (See Footnote 6), only forty-one out of ninety-one children with IQ 136 or more (Binet) were nominated as gifted by their teachers, and it emerged that no one screening procedure by itself was sufficient to identify gifted children with any degree of effectiveness. The experience of the Tempest research group from Liverpool University was very similar (See Footnote 6a). Out of the seventy-two children in the last term of an infant school nominated as gifted by their teachers, only twenty-four had IQs of 127 on the group intelligence test used (D.Young, Non-Readers' Intelligence Test, 1966). Of the top thirty children selected as gifted after individual tests, only fourteen had been included in the nominated group. Tempest concedes that, as the children were only about seven, identifying the gifted among them was a much more difficult task than in the Pegnato and Birch enquiry, but he points out that it is surprising that two children overlooked by their teachers had a reading age six years above their chronological age as measured by the Schonell Word Recognition Test.

The evidence of these two studies suggests that teacher recognition is a very imperfect means of identifying those children who are outstandingly able. It is unfortunately the case, however, that for the majority of schools there is very little alternative. As part of his study on gifted children in primary schools, Ogilvie attempted to assess the extent of special provision designed to help teachers to recognise gifted pupils. LEss were asked to indicate whether advisory staff gave any guidance in this matter and whether headteachers were encouraged to seek advice through a referral system. From the answers to these questions it emerged that only 17.5% of LEAs provided guidance to teachers and only 26.3% had a referral system. Furthermore, there appeared to be little doubt that the referral systems are used for problem children rather than for the specific purpose of identifying gifted children. (The full figures are presented in Appendix 1.)

In view of the ineffectiveness of teacher-recognition of gifted pupils and the widespread neglect of this subject by local authorities, it is evident that there is at present a serious failure to identify giftedness in our schools. This conclusion is borne out both by Ogilvie's study and the recent Government report on middle and comprehensive schools. Ogilvie found that about a half of primary school teachers agree that many gifted children go unrecognised in school. One of the study groups set up by Ogilvie commented that the recogntion of gifted children is "the biggest gamble in the whole educational sphere ... (it is) so dependent on luck". The Government report found that "many schools either have not thought about giftedness or hold very imprecise notions regarding its nature ... ". It also found that school records were poor and that information about special gifts, other than in music or sports, were rarely passed on when children transferred from one school to another. Furthermore, say the inspectors, "There is in our view, a notable lack of cross-checking between the contributory and receiving school records to see if high specific or general achievement in one school is paralleled with that in the other".

3.  The failure to provide for the special educational needs of gifted children.

In view of the general tendency of both local authorities and schools to deny or ignore the special needs of gifted children, one would not expect to find any widespread provision for these needs. This is, indeed, the picture that emerges from Ogilvie's questionnaire to LEAs about help given to gifted pupils in primary schools. LEAs were asked to give details of any special arrangements made for such pupils, and the questionnaire was designed to cover almost every type of special provision that could conceivably have been made. The answers indicated clearly the low level of provision (See Appendix 1). Only about one quarter of $LEAs provided Saturday morning classes, and the centres that did exist for this purpose are usually confined to musical activities. Indeed the enquiry revealed that there was not one single example of a Saturday morning class in mathematics, science or languages. With regard to the award of scholarships and exhibitions to pupils gifted in a particular activity, it was found that only a minority of authorities provided for part-time tuition in colleges of music  or other specialised institutions, although 50 per cent provided for full-time tuition of this kind. Ogilvie noted in particular the greater opportunity available to children living in London to develop any special talents. Only 4.5 per cent of authorities provided enrichment classes in school hours, and this is clearly a most unpopular way of helping gifted children. When it came to early admission to secondary schools, it was discovered that at least a quarter of authorities have  consciously discontinued a policy that was once universal. Ogilvie concludes this part of his survey by remarking of these special arrangements that, "None are universal, and many are not included to any significant extent in the provisions of an appreciable number of authorities. The type of arrangement likely to be most favoured is that which whilst giving opportunity for the gifted child to excel can also be represented as part of 'proper' provision for every child who might wish to take part."

It is often argued that there is a decreasing need to "promote" or make other special arrangements for gifted children in primary schools as there is an increasing emphasis on individualisation of learning within the primary schools themselves. In practice, this individualisation largely refers to what is called "project" work. After very detailed observation of teaching practices in primary schools, Ogilvie asserts with regard to this project method that "Observation in schools reveals what must be regarded as a serious and most difficult situation". For not only do teachers differ widely in what  they consider to be acceptable standards of work, but they tend only to mark in a most cursory and general manner. Very rarely are they able to compare what different children achieve in project work with their own previous work or the work of others. Much of the project work produced by children tends to be of a descriptive character, and there is little guarantee that project methods, per se, will stretch the abilities of very able children more than more conventional methods. These difficulties have obvious management implications, as teachers in large classes are rarely able to devote sufficient time to monitor the work of individual pupils to ensure either that the individualised tasks are appropriate to them or that satisfactory development is being achieved.

If the gifted child fares poorly in primary schools, one cannot be confident that his treatment at secondary school will be improved. At the secondary level the very gifted within selective schools are differentiated by the practices of streaming and acceleration. In direct grant schools and grammar schools of high academic standards, these measures no doubt do much to help the development of giftedness, but even here it is difficult to see the extent to which content and teaching method are differentiated for the exceptionally able. The syllabus is largely determined by the requirements of external examinations, and the gifted pupil is often extended only by taking a greater number of subjects than other students. At the sixth form stage the brilliant mathematician or scientist will probably be in a small set of able pupils, but he may still be held back by the relative inability of his contemporaries. In the smaller grammar school this factor will seriously weaken any chance of special provision for the gifted pupil; furthermore, the danger of such a pupil outstripping his teachers becomes acute.

In recent years the main area of debate in secondary education has been that of grouping, both within and without the school. The increasing prevalence of comprehensive schools and of mixed ability teaching groups has increased the likelihood that special ability will be neglected. The greater quantity and range of management problems within comprehensives have reduced the ability and readiness of senior staff to consider the problem of the gifted, and mixed ability grouping, while tending, it is true, towards the individualisation of teaching methods, brings with it the dangers and difficulties associated with project work in primary schools.Whatever the theoretical claims made by comprehensive schools, one can only conclude that wastage of educational talent is more likely to occur within this type of school than in the selective type.

If the selective secondary school is well suited to the reasonably able pupil, and the efforts of the comprehensive school are concentrated more on the needs of the average and below average pupil, it is clear that neither type is designed to cater for the exceptionally able pupil. Some direct grant and independent schools, by virtue of their superior resources, are able to  achieve more in this respect, but as schools within the state sector will never be able to match such resources more economic and efficient methods of providing for the gifted must be found.

The above survey has outlined the general neglect of the problem of giftedness within schools. This neglect, it has been shown, stems from a combination of factors - an indifferent attitude, ignorance, lack of resources, and structural difficulties. Above all, it is essential to to recognise fully the fact of giftedness and the wastage of talent that will occur if adequate provision for it is not made. It is scarcely satisfactory that a child of ten with an IQ of 140, and who is therefore able to work at the intellectual level of an average fourteen year-old, should only be doing, albeit very well, the work normally done by children of his own age. Leta Hollingsworth, an American research psychologist, wrote in 1942: "In the ordinary elementary school situation children of 140 IQ waste half their time. Those above 170 IQ waste practically all of their time" (See Footnote 7). In addition, as Dr. Kellmer Pringle has established, lack of cultural or intellectual stimulation, both at home and at school, can contribute to severe behavioural difficulties amongst gifted children (See Footnote 8).

In the past decade a growing interest in the education of gifted children has emerged in Britain. The creation of the National Association for Gifted Children in 1966 was an important date, and the First World Conference on Gifted Children was held in London in 1975. In the interim the literature on the subject has been expanded by various studies and investigations (See Footnote 9), while a number of special programmes for gifted children of primary school age have been undertaken (See Footnote 10). The Schools Council set up in 1969 set up a working party to study the teaching of gifted children, and this led to the commissioning of the Ogilvie report on gifted pupils in primary schools. The D.E.S. published a study on gifted children in 1975 (See Footnote 11) as a preliminary to the investigation by H.M.Inspectorate of Education into the teaching of gifted children in middle and comprehensive schools, the report of which, published in August 1977, coincided with the Second World Conference on Gifted Children in San Francisco. However, in spite of this considerable weight of academic and official interest in the subject, there has, as yet, been little administrative response from either LEAs or schools to deal with the problem of gifted children.

If this interest in gifted children is to be translated into action, the requirements of organising their education must be delineated, alternatives considered, and management implications pondered. Decisions must be concentrated on the following areas:

   (1) defining giftedness;

   (2) recognising the gifted child;

   (3) identifying the educational needs of the gifted child; and

   (4) making appropriate provision for the needs of the gifted child.

B.  AREAS OF MANAGEMENT DECISION

1.  Defining giftedness.

The achievement of a satisfactory definition of giftedness is necessary as the identification of gifted children for any special form of education will turn upon the criteria of giftedness used. The definition provided must therefore indicate the behaviour, or behaviours, that will show whether a child is to be considered gifted or not. Ogilvie suggests the following:

   "The term 'gifted' is used to indicate any child who is outstanding in either a general or specific ability, in a relatively broad or narrow field of endeavour ... Where generally recognised tests exist as (say) in the case of 'intelligence', then 'giftedness' would be defined by test scores. Where no recognised tests exist it can be assumed that the subjective opinions of 'experts' in the various fields on the creative qualities of originality and imagination displayed would be the criteria we have in mind".

This definition is an honest one; it faces the criterion problem frankly, and is not based on administrative convenience. Ogilvie prefers the term 'outstanding' to 'gifted' because it is less 'emotive' and 'more obviously relative to given contexts'. However, to be 'outstanding' begs the following questions:

   (a)  Outstanding in relation to what group?

   (b)  Outstanding in what particular activity?

   (c)  Outstanding as evidenced by location in what upper proportion of the designated group?

a.  Outstanding in relation to what group?

In this context, a child can be 'outstanding' in two senses. He may be gifted in comparison with the rest of his class or school, but not exceptional in relation to all his coevals. On the other hand, he may be gifted in terms of the total population, i.e. his ability and achievement is outstanding with regard to all children of his age group, not just those within his own school. The child who is outstanding in the first sense may cause problems to his teachers, but he is not the subject of this enquiry. Our concern is with the child who is outstanding in relation to all pupils of his age and who may indeed be outstripping not just his fellow-pupils but his teachers also.

b.  Outstanding in what particular activity?

This is by far the most awkward of the three questions and merits particular attention. Superficially, it is concerned with the curriculum: what activities are discriminating enough, or important enough, for gifted pupils to receive special facilities? Or perhaps one might ask what are the subjects where gifted pupils require particular stimulation.

It is tempting to confine ones's definition of giftedness to the traditional subjects of the school curriculum, but there are serious difficulties here. Firstly, there is now a marked lack of consensus at both primary and secondary levels as to what the legitimate subjects of the curriculum are, and, secondly, it is clear that to limit the number of activities is to increase the likelihood of talent remaining undetected. In fact, there is a growing belief today that many "extra-curricular" activities should be supported by public funds, and there is a progressive blurring of the lines that distinguish the "cultural" activities (e.g. music, drama) from the "vocational" (e.g. handicraft, cookery) and the "leisure" (e.g. rock-climbing, photography). Furthermore, schools are providing an increasing range of sorting activities: golf, sailing and orienteering, etc, are often added to the more traditional team games. Some schools now organise "clubs" during the hours of the school day, in which as wide a variety of activities as possible are encouraged and offered as options. Unfortunately, economic constraints are bound to to limit the number of activities in which exceptional talent can be publicly supported, and, as Ogilvie discovered in his survey, teachers are unable to suggest any principle which could justify such support of some extra-curricular activities rather than others.

In spite of these difficulties, the administrator is likely to be faced with a decision, and it is suggested that there should be two types of activity, where special help for the gifted should be given as a priority. The first comprises those "academic" or "intellectual" activities where progress is made on a "sequential" basis, and in which outstanding pupils are especially liable to be retarded by the presence of average ones. Mathematics, the sciences, engineering and foreign languages are the subjects that one has in mind in this context. The second area for particular concern should be those cultural activities which have traditionally been supported from public funds and where early training is necessary for optimum development. Music and ballet are the most obvious subjects here. These are the activities where special provision seems most appropriate, but, while such priorities must be included in our definition, wherever possible giftedness in other areas should be included too: creative writing, literary appreciation, humanities, the visual arts, drama and sport are all areas where arrangements to stimulate exceptional talent would be valuable.

Curricular considerations are however secondary to the deeper questions of the structure of human abilities and of the extent to which this structure is represented in the curriculum at all. Our sole concern with the task of defining giftedness is to assist us in the process of recognising gifted pupils, and before we can organise special programmes for them and decide which activities to emphasise we must decide on the criteria according to which these gifted pupils may be selected. For we shall need to recognise such giftedness long before exceptional ability at, say, engineering or foreign languages will have shown itself. In the identification of gifted pupils three parameters are usually employed today: general intelligence, special abilities, and creativity. All three must be covered in an adequate definition of giftedness.

In the main British psychologists have emphasised that the primary factor determining an individual's potential achievement is his innate allowance of general intelligence (the "g" factor), and early psychologists were content to base definitions of giftedness on tests of intelligence. Performance in one or more of these tests of
general ability has always been the most commonly applied criterion of giftedness in both research and selection.

However, there has been a general tendency in recent years to concentrate on special abilities, and to regard "g" as a secondary factor or indeed as non-existent. American psychologists have specialised in this multi-factorial approach to the composition of intelligence (See Footnote 12). The existence of a polymathic giftedness, which enables a pupil to be outstanding at almost everything, is likely to be so rare a phenomenon as to be non-existent. This is demonstrated clearly in a table, published in Ogilvie's report, which shows the theoretical expectations of the incidence of this type of giftedness (See Appendix 2).With intercorrelations among the dimensions approaching those found among items in intelligence tests, the table clearly shows that where fifty-five children per thousand are considered gifted in one dimension, this number will have fallen to three after three dimensions and to one after seven. Where only eighteen children per thousand are taken as gifted in one dimension, the number drops to one after three dimensions and, with a curriculum including only four dimensions it will be a waste of time to look for polymathic giftedness at all. When Ogilvie looked at the incidence of specific giftedness (See Appendix 2), however, the theoretical expectations were indicative of a more rewarding situation. With the same intercorrelations as above, nearly a quarter of the child population will be in the top 5.5% in one out of the eight dimensions, and a tenth will be in the top 1.8%. It would seem, therefore, that specific giftedness is a more useful quantity to seek than a high general intelligence manifesting itself throughout the curriculum.

Nevertheless, the weight of experimental evidence would suggest the existence of a common factor of general intelligence. Although it is possible to analyse mental qualities in such a way that no "g" factor is found, the results of special ability teats are generally correlated to some degree. The strength of the correlation depends to a great extent on the homogeneity of the group tested. In heterogeneous groups, such as whole age-groups of children, correlation of abilities tends to be high enough to yield a strong "g" component. Thus, most gifted children in a primary school population who show special talents will be high in intelligence, and vice-versa. However, in sixth forms or universities, where the range of ability is restricted, specialised abilities stand out more strongly. Although the status of "g" is difficult to establish, the theory of general intelligence is consonant with the amount of overlapping in curriculum dimensions that occurs. Intelligence correlates strongly with activities such as writing, science, mathematics and languages, but less highly with mechanical, constructional, visual, musical, and dramatic talents, and only slightly with athletic prowess.

The debate about the structure of intelligence has been further complicated in the past fifteen years by the apparent discovery of a new factor, creativity. It has been claimed that the criteria of ability implicit in the usual intelligence tests are too narrow, and that creativity and originality are the hallmarks of true giftedness. Attempts have been made to identify creativity as a factor independent of intelligence (See Footnote 14), and to link originality with a particular cognitive style (See Footnote 15). These studies have been strongly criticised on methodological grounds, and claims that tests of creativity show no correlation with intelligence tests probably only reflect the inefficiency of the tests used. The evidence for the existence of creativity as a special factor of intelligence is nevertheless strong. According to Burt, " ... whatever may be its precise psychological nature, its proportionate contribution, if we may trust the figures obtained in the various factorial studies, is about one-third that of 'general intelligence'. Creativity without general intelligence produces nothing of interest or value".

The dispute over the relative independence of intelligence and creativity can be eased by the concept of "thresholds". The creativity and intelligence correlations that are made available by Ogilvie (See Appendix 3) suggest that in above average IQ groups structured correlations are low, but among groups of average intelligence, they are much higher. A similar threshold is discernible in correlations between intelligence and attainment. Ogilvie concludes significantly as follows: "Taking the two tables together it is apparent that the threshold phenomenon is likely to be widespread in the curriculum and occurs even with regard to those activities like mathematics and languages which have traditionally been regarded as "intellectual" and heavily loaded on "g". One striking implication of this situation ... is that those who argue from the fact that "slow learners" need and receive special education to the idea that the highly intelligent should also receive special treatment, take too simple a view of the situation. Whereas the former will tend to appear as a group, regardless of which particular dimension or dimensions are used for purposes of identification, this will be far less true with regard to the latter." This conclusion has clear implications for any discussion of provision of special educational facilities.

To sum up, although it is probable that creativity is not independent, but a factor, of general intelligence, it would seem likely that there is a threshold on the IQ scale, at about 120 points, below which an intelligence test score is the best predictor of academic achievement, but above which measures of creativity become important in the prediction of the attainment of some children. Thus, creativity, together with general intelligence and special abilities, is a component of giftedness.

c.  Outstanding as evidenced by location in what upper proportion of the designated group?

Of course it is impossible to decide exactly at what point a child becomes so intelligent as to require special educational provision. Giftedness is a matter of degree, and precise borderlines cannot be fixed. Once again, however, an administrative decision is necessary, and fortunately statistics relating to the distribution of intelligence in the population helps us to arrive at a satisfactory answer. The figures shown in the table below show the approximate number of children at high IQ levels cut off by different borderlines on the most recently constructed general intelligence tests. (As these figures relate to a total school population they will vary between different schools):

          IQ                % of Popn. 
         150+                  0.1
         140+                  0.5
         130+                  2.5
         120+                10.0

Different cut-off points have been advocated. Terman took 1% as the borderline for his study of gifted children in California (See Footnote 16). De Haan and Havighurst (See Footnote 17), however, suggested that as much as the top 10% should be considered gifted. Gallagher (See Footnote 18) believed that there was general agreement on the top 2%, and this is close to the top 2-3% in which the National Association for Gifted Children is interested. Gold remarks that "the cut-off point is significant because it may defeat its own purpose if set too high or too low, If set too high it may eliminate youngsters of high ability who for one reason or another do not test well. If set too low it may include so wide a range that highly advanced, challenging or difficult programs become impossible because they would result in frustration for a proportion of the selected group" (See Footnote 19).

This advice is crucial to achieving the best cut-off point, and in its light it would seem that IQ 130 or 2.5% is most appropriate as a rough borderline, above which children become too different from the average to adjust well to ordinary schooling and too intelligent for most teachers to be able to provide for their special requirements. However, the need to be flexible in applying such a borderline must be stressed.

It is still necessary to consider those who are distinguished more by special talents or creativity measures than by high IQ. Obviously, decisions taken here must be related to whatever facilities are available in schools, but one would expect that help for this type of giftedness could be provided. Once again the top 2.5% in each curriculum dimension could be included on our definition of gifted, as most high IQ children are specifically talented and vice-versa. De Haan and Havighurst, however, estimated that 20% would be gifted if one considered the top 10% over eight dimensions. Our top 2.5% in each dimension would bring us down to about 5%, that is, double the number considered gifted solely on the basis of an IQ score of 130 points. The discrepancy between this conclusion and the theoretical expectations of the incidence of specific giftedness (See Appendix 2) is probably the greatest number of gifted children for whom schools could afford to provide special facilities. At a rough estimate, for instance, this would entail making special provision for 200,000 out of an approximate secondary school population of four million. (One is not of course suggesting that this provision would be similar for all of these gifted children.)  

Conclusion.

The following definition of  "giftedness" is suggested:

The term "gifted" is defined as indicating any pupil who is outstanding:

(a) in relation to all children of his age-group within the population;

(b) especially in those academic subjects where progress is made on a sequential basis, in those cultural                                        activities which have traditionally been supported by public funds and where early training is necessary for optimal development;

(c) according to the three parameters of general intelligence, special ability, and creativity; and

(d) as located in the top 2.5% of the population according to tests of general intelligence (i.e. IQ 130), or in the top 2.5% in dimensions of special ability and creativity, provided that his IQ does not fall below 120.

Where recognised tests exist, "giftedness" would be identified by test scores; where no such tests exist, it would be identified by the subjective opinions of experts in the various fields.

The identification or recognition of the gifted pupil is our next concern.

2.  Recognising the gifted child.

A variety of methods will be considered individually before a conclusion as to the best combination is made.

a. Intelligence tests.

Intelligence tests have been assailed on a number of grounds: that they favour the verbal or advantaged child, that they are culturally "loaded", or that the child's performance may vary according to the circumstances in which the test is taken. The fact remains, however, that those few children who do well in them are usually among our brightest, and in trained hands the individual test of general intelligence provides the most important predictor of giftedness, particularly in the age range of 6-15. It is advisable to wait until the Second Year Infants Class to apply such tests, due to the variability of intelligence with growth up to the age of six. However, there is some disagreement here, and it has been claimed that gifted children can be reliably identified at the age of four and a half because of their advanced mental age (See Footnote 20). After the age of fifteen, in spite of the continuing growth of intelligence, test results become less representative of general ability because the short items, presented at speed, are a poorer sample of the complex mental processes that make up academic and vocational tasks. At any age a single test is unreliable, and it is preferable for a school to apply tests, say, every two years, and enter the results on a cumulative record card. Consistently high IQ scores or a rising trend are the surest basis to predict future ability.

The best individual intelligence tests are the Terman-Merrill (or Revised Stanford-Binet) with 1972 norms for children from four and a half to eight, and the Revised Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC-R), using either the Verbal or the Full Scale. As the standard deviation on the spread of scores is 16 on the former and 15 on the latter, IQ 132 on the Terman-Merrill is equivalent to 130 on the WISC. The WISC is often preferred to the Terman-Merrill for older children, because it has a performance scale, based on items such as "object assemblies" and "block design", as well as a verbal scale. However the interpretation of performance IQs must be cautious. These do not relate highly to scientific or ability as do the paper-and-pencil non-verbal or spatial tests. Verbal IQs alone is a more accurate predictor of most scholastic abilities than the Full Scale which incorporates both verbal and performance IQs. However, when the the performance greatly exceeds the verbal IQ, this may be indicative of a linguistic handicap, such as might be suffered by an immigrant child. In such a case, the performance IQ might be the best indicator of ability.

Although a high score on a properly administered intelligence test is widely accepted as the best single index of giftedness, these tests do have limitations which must be recognised. They discriminate reasonably well between children of different levels of general ability throughout the population but less well when identifying children of high ability whose intellectual response is unusual or "divergent", no doubt because standardised questions cannot, by their very nature, elicit complex or inventive behaviour. Furthermore, because intelligence tests are standardised on a population covering the complete ability range, they will identify the top 2.5-5% according to the criteria built into them, but they do not discriminate well at the top end of scale. Indeed, when dealing with the top 2.5%, re-testing will probably lead to considerable changes in rank order. In addition, the incorporation in the modern tests of  "deviation IQs", by which raw scores are converted to a normal distribution with a fixed standard deviation, while producing the advantage of greater consistency among IQs, has considerably restricted the range of scores. Thus in the WISC-R, scores are scarcely ever above 140, and in the Terman-Merrill 166 is now the maximum, whereas under conditions of classical scoring, scores of 160-200 used to occur frequently. If one accepts Burt's claim that the distribution of intelligence does not follow the normal curve, this failure to discriminate at the top end is more serious. According to Burt (See Footnote 21), there are very much greater numbers of children with extremely high IQs of, say, 160+ under classical scoring than would be expected from conventional statistics. Whereas normal curve calculations allow for only 3.3 per million, Burt would claim the existence of 77 per million. Thus, modern IQs discriminate poorly amongst the very bright and this is a serious disadvantage when a child with an IQ of 165 is as much ahead of one with an IQ of 135 as the latter is ahead of the average child. Of course, one cannot expect one test to measure many things well, and the alternative is to use a variety of tests  once giftedness has been revealed. Alice Heim has compiled a test of high level intelligence (AH5), but this is designed for secondary school students. Other tests like this need to developed; such tests might have more limited functions, but could be used to complement general intelligence scores.

Because individual testing is time-consuming, and involves the use of trained personnel, it is a very costly process, and the use of group intelligence tests of the initial screening of gifted children should be considered. For children of 10 and over, these tests are particularly useful. Tests which include both verbal and non-verbal sections, such as the Lorge-Thorndike, are particularly appropriate, as they may help to identify the mathematically and scientifically minded child who might not show up particularly well on the verbal section alone. However, entirely non-verbal  tests such as Raven's "Progressive Matrices" have a low predictive value. Pictorial group test IQs for young children of 5-8 have poor correlations with later IQs or with academic achievement. More useful for young children from 6-10 would be an orally administered verbal group test such as Cornwell's (1952) (See Footnote 22).

In general, group tests have only limited value. Their norms will differ from test to test, and they may have insufficient ceilings to yield IQs much above 125. Thus, the tester seeking to pick out the top 2.5% (i.e. the group corresponding to IQ 130+ on the WISC-R) would need to collect norms from the school or district and find out which score is actually achieved by the top 2.5%.  Futhermore, as Bridges discovered during his "Millfield Experiment", group test results correlate poorly with individual intelligence scores when one takes the very bright as the population. On the other hand, Pegnato and Birch (See Footnote 23) discovered that the group test was the most efficient "screening" method of identifying gifted children (i.e. it identified the fewest students whose IQs were below the cut-off point selected). Group tests, therefore, have value, but mainly as a preliminary screening process. In their use, it would be wise to allow wide limits. If one's aim is to  identify all pupils with IQ 130+ or those with special talents and IQ 120+, it would be necessary to take into account the top 10-15% on the group test.

b.  Special aptitude tests.

In the light of our definition of giftedness it would be useful to obtain data on special aptitudes. There are, unfortunately, very few tests likely to be of assistance in diagnosing special aptitudes. The ones that do exist are mainly for older adolescents and seldom contribute more to selection than ordinary intelligence tests. As regards mechanical aptitude, the WISC-R Block Design performance sub-test is relevant, though it is really a general ability test. There are time-consuming practical tests, based on assembling mechanical objects, but more widely used are group tests based on mechanical and physical operations. In music the best validated set of tests is Wing's Standardized Tests of Musical Intelligence, for which norms are available for English children of 7-15. Although lengthy in application, this battery of seven sub-tests is useful in deciding whether a child would benefit from music lessons. Also of interest in this context are the series of informal special aptitude tests devised by De Haan and Havighurst (See Footnote 24) for talent identification during a programme for the gifted at Portland, Oregon. They used a "work-sample" method to screen in the areas of art, creative writing, music, drama, physical aptitudes and mechanical skills, while social leadership was assessed by sociometric nominations.

c.  School achievement.

Marks or grades given for tests and examinations in school can be of value, particularly if such achievement tests are standardised. Pegnato and Birch found group achievement tests were, after group intelligence tests, the next most efficient screening method for giftedness.However, such achievement tests can be misleading if they do not provide scope for advanced talent. Furthermore, many of the gifted are poorly motivated in the conventional situation, and do not produce work which matches their potential. Thus, to demand a high level of attainment before admitting a child to a programme for the gifted might be to disqualify the ones most in need of special help.

Reading is the aspect of school achievement of greatest importance to the young pupil, and reading combined with comprehension tests, such as Schonell's, Watt's, Burt's, or Vernon's, are easily applied and furnish reading ages, which are of importance in assessing children. By the age of nine they are usually too easy for the verbally gifted child, but, if the teacher discovers this, then he has acquired the information he needs.

d.  Creativity tests.

Creativity tests are a much heralded advance, but in fact they have little to recommend them. While creativity tests may be useful in discovering the nature of creativity it is unlikely that they will ever be a major component of selection for special programmes. Vernon exposes their shortcomings as follows; "Most psychologists who write about divergent thinking tests call them creativity tests. But this implies that they are valid measures of the psychological characteristics (of creativity) ... a claim that is certainly not justified. Because divergent thinking tests involve giving unusual associations, this does not mean that they are measuring the same kind of originality as that shown by the creative artist or scientist, or even the normal child or adult who produces something constructive" (See Footnote 26). In addition to this validity problem, creativity tests are most awkward to mark due to their open-ended nature, and it is of course highly doubtful that original behaviour can just be turned on to order in a testing situation.

However, there may be occasions, for instance, when a child is believed to have unusual responses or is a borderline case for special programmes, in which it would be helpful to have scores on divergent thinking. The best known are the Torrance (or Minnesota) Tests of Creativity (See Footnote 27). However, Bridges found them very difficult to score and unsuitable for young children, when he used them in the "Millfield Experiment". In fact, other tests are needed, and the tester should prepare his own stock of common and unusual responses rather than relying on lists devised for different cultural groups such as Torrance's.

e.  Teacher nomination.

Due to the limitations of both intelligence and achievement tests, much of the responsibility for recognising gifted children must fall upon their teachers. Although the research of Pegnato and Birch, and later of Tempest, would suggest that teacher nomination is a poor method of screening, teachers' evaluation could become much more accurate if their attention were drawn to the characteristics of gifted children for which they should be looking. To help them do this, several rating scales or checklists of the behavioural characteristics of gifted children have been compiled in America (See Footnote 28).

In this country, Ogilvie has produced, in the course of his invaluable study on gifted children in primary schools, some interesting data concerning teachers' views as to the characteristics of giftedness (See Appendix 4). 370 teachers were asked to rate 20 criteria as reliable indicators of giftedness. The characteristics obtaining the highest recognition rate were "intense curiosity" and "wide vocabulary" (both 65%). Then came "imaginative writing" (56%), high intelligence test scores (53%), rapid reading (48%), and "display of extraordinary initiative" (48%). The fact that no characteristic received more than 65% recognition indicates that teachers do not believe that giftedness reveals itself invariably in one type of behaviour.

A concise checklist of behavioural characteristics was devised by Laycock (1957) (See Footnote 29), and was included in a pamphlet on gifted children issued by the School Psychological Service of West Sussex C.C. It was subsequently published in the recent D.E.S. pamphlet (1975) (See Footnote 30). It consists of only twenty behavioural characeristics, unlike some of the interminably long rating scales that have been devised, and, even though the predictive value of the items has not been validated, the checklist should be of great use to teachers. (It is contained in Appendix 5).

If teacher observation is to be sufficiently systematic to be valuable as a screening method in the identification of the gifted, such observation must be documented in a careful record system. Where a child is known or is thought to be gifted, a checklist such as the one suggested should be raised annually and considered by all his teachers for their comments. When the child moves to another school these records should be passed on. Discrepancies in teacher evaluation or sharp decline in performance should be investigated with care.

It must be emphasised that gifted children need to be given the opportunity for their talents to be both recognised and developed. Schools must provide opportunities for high intelligence and originality to display themselves; such abilities do not just emerge. Teachers, especially in primary schools, must accept that their job is not just to train children in standard skills, but to provide the chances for future potential to be diagnosed. Project work is one important way of providing children with the necessary experiences for their individual abilities to show, but Ogilvie's warnings as to the variable standards of assessment and cognitive assessment in present-day project work (See Section A.3 above) must be heeded.

(f)  Parental information.

Parents have more time to observe the intellectual capabilities of their children than teachers, and in particular they are able to provide useful information about their leisure time activities and hobbies. Parents can be asked to fill in standard questionnaires designed to provide details about the characteristics of their children. They could be asked to do this either as a part of a systematic campaign of identification, or in circumstances where they felt that a school had failed to recognise the giftedness of their children. Of course, parental information must be treated with circumspection. Some parents are quite unable to be detached about their children, and exaggerate their abilities greatly; others are too uninterested or uneducated to observe anything unusual in any case. Any considerable reliance on parental diagnoses would tend to favour middle class children. However, parental information, considered judiciously and in conjunction with other data, would be valuable in identifying gifted children. A questionnaire devised for circulation to parents in a Canadian city in order to provide information on the need for special provision for the gifted was published by Vernon in his recent book. The questions which it asked of parents are contained in Appendix 6. The questionnaire not only seeks to elicit information about the abilities and the interests of the children but also requests details about parental help and encouragement.

g.  Personality tests.

Cattell and Butcher (1968) (See Footnote 31) suggest that attempts to select children in a way that will predict scholastic achievement must not be too narrow or scope, but should take into account personality, motivation, and extra-curricular accomplishments as well. Some psychologists favour the giving of such things as personality questionnaires, projective devices (such as apperception tests) and interest inventories in diagnosing the gifted. These techniques are not to be recommended however. Personality testing is very expensive and time-consuming, and would require trained psychologists to do their work. Projective devices have their uses in studying the emotionally disturbed but are not appropriate in the identification of the gifted. Interest inventories have been applied to vocational guidance, but have not as yet been applied to finding gifted children.

Before the various recommendations made above are summarised it is appropriate to consider again the research findings of Pegnato and Birch (1959). They sought to find out the most "effective" and "efficient" screening procedures for identifying gifted children in a junior high school at Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. They expressed "effectiveness" as the percentage of gifted children located, and "efficiency" as the ratio of the number selected by screening to the number identified as gifted. They discovered that group intelligence tests produced the best combination of effectiveness and efficiency, but, as none of the methods used were particularly accurate, the main implication of their research is that the more criteria are used the more accurate a screening procedure is likely to be. Their most interesting findings, compiled in tabular form, are contained at Appendix 7. Anyone concerned in the identification of gifted children should study them carefully.

It is also instructive to consider the identification procedures actually used to select children for two recent special programmes for gifted children in this country to which we have already made reference. In the Tempest experiment at Southport, children were screened by teacher nomination and by a group test of intelligence; the children selected by the screening were then individually tested by WISC, a Schonell Word Recognition Test, and a number of items designed to measure "creativity" or "divergent thinking". In his experiment at Millfield School, Bridges already had WISC or Terman-Merrill scores for many of his pupils. So, he completed his screening by a group intelligence test (the AH4), and then set two types of creativity test to the most promising. The first type was an essay with a "divergent" title, e.g. "The Monkey that Flies", or "The Girl Who Plays Football"; the second technique used was Torrance's Tests of Creativity - "Thinking Creatively with Words", and "Thinking Creatively with Pictures".

Conclusion.

To conclude this section on the recognition of gifted children, it is clear that intelligence tests are the most valuable single tool of identification but that a range of techniques are most appropriate. Children can be profitably assessed by intelligence tests from the age of six to fifteen, and a systematic assessment using a variety of techniques are most appropriate for children between the ages of nine and fourteen. Procedures for the identification of the gifted should be geared to the overall testing programme of the school, and it should be possible for both primary and secondary schools to run their own schemes to pick out the top 5% of their pupils. Children should be assessed at regular intervals by as wide a range of techniques as possible in order that numerous kinds of ability can be detected. Pupil profiles could be built up, based on the results of standardised group intelligence tests, school achievement tests, and the systematic observations of teachers and parents. So-called "creativity tests" might play some part too.

Trained psychologists working for the education authorities should play a large part in the identification process. It would be desirable if psychologists could test individually all children referred to them  by schools as "gifted", but, if this procedure was considered too expensive, this individual testing could be restricted to borderline cases or cases where responses are unusual. Professional psychologists should also advise schools as to the best group tests of intelligence and creativity available, and monitor the whole identification process. Local authorities should ask schools for annual returns of gifted pupils in order that regular checks could be made as to the extent of giftedness in area or a school.

It must be stressed that secondary schools have as a large a part to play in the identification process as primary schools, as the identification of the gifted is an on-going, not a once-and-for-all, assessment. If a school or an authority plans expensive special programmes for the gifted, i.e. special schools or special classes, it would clearly be appropriate to be particularly careful about identification. For instance, all children selected for a special school for the gifted should be individually tested by WISC or Terman-Merrill.

Identification procedures should be monitored and assessed themselves. Numbers of gifted children actually recognised could be compared with the expected frequency as determined in the table for the incidence of specific giftedness at Appendix 2. Where discrepancies occur it might be that recognition was inefficient; on the other hand the environment of the school will play a considerable part in the number of gifted children discovered. Nevertheless, De Haan and Havighurst suggest that the most frequently missed children are those whose parents are of low occupational status, coloureds, those from rural areas, and girls. Furthermore, if more than two-thirds of the identified children come from professional and middle class homes, then the identification process is probably faulty.

Finally, it must be acknowledged that the recognition system must take account of changes. Some children, apparently gifted at an early stage, will fail. to fulfil their promise; others, not appearing much above average at first, should be reconsidered if evidence of superior abilities emerges later. Thus, a constant process of assessment is essential.

3.  Identification of the needs of the gifted child.

Once children have been recognised as gifted in accordance with the criteria delineated on our definition, it is necessary to identify their particular educational needs as a group. Of course, we shall be dealing with generalisations. Any child's needs vary according to his background, personality and talents, and not all children have identified needs. At the same time, their needs only differ from the needs of other children by degree, and they share the same basis needs as other children. e.g. physical and emotional security, motivation. However, if we are to organise a learning environment in which talent can be maximised, generalisations about the gifted are unavoidable.

A considerable amount has been written about the needs of gifted children, much of which has the nature of pious admonition. Our concern is with those needs which have direct implication for the management of education. Once again, Ogilvie's report is the most useful source of reference. According to the evidence of his questionnaire, teachers believed it was vitally important to recognise giftedness, i.e. gifted children do not just emerge naturally, and hence we have been greatly concerned with the process of identification. The further needs of gifted children was one of the areas set for the consideration of teachers' study groups. From the reports of the study groups. From the reports of these study groups Ogilvie listed the following as primary needs of gifted children:

 1. Contact with their average peers.
 2. Contact with children of comparable levels of ability.
 3. To be stretched and challenged even to the point of experiencing failure and humbling experiences.
 4. To be guided, rather than directed, through a more academic approach to  a greater depth of treatment.
 5. To avoid being set apart, but to have the opportunity to set self apart on occasions.
 6. To pass rapidly through elementary stages and use advanced resources.
 7. To pursue their own lines of approach.
 8. To be exposed to some form of counselling - and their parents too.
 9. To be treated like other children.
10. To have contact with teachers gifted in similar fields.
11. To have the opportunity and encouragement to exercise specific talents.

Ogilvie also invited the Schools Council subject committees to comment on the needs of gifted children. Little of importance was added by them. However, the music subject committee stressed the need for early provision of special provision in that subject, as "delay may prevent the natural unfolding of a creative or executant talent, on account of the complexity of the skills involved in musical expression, and the consequent   need for acquiring them very early in life".

Having decided what the educational needs of gifted children are, the educational administrator is now in a position to consider how he can provide them most appropriately.

4.  Making appropriate provision for the educational needs of the gifted child.

In framing an effective scheme for gifted children, the administrator is faced by several alternatives. Basically, these alternatives are reducible to a threefold classification under the following headings: segregation - total or partial; acceleration; and enrichment. These can conveniently be considered separately, although in practice they tend to occur in combinations.

Criteria.

When the relative desirability of these practices are considered, the following criteria must be borne in mind:

i. The extent of the problem, i.e. the number of gifted children and their proportion in relation to total school population; and also the range of giftedness.

ii. The density and sparsity of the population. As there will be a greater number of children in the centres of population, a greater variety of provision will be possible in rural areas.

iii. The age of the pupils. Educational needs vary according to age: in the primary school a general education provides the opportunity for a wide range of talent to be diagnosed, while at the secondary level a greater degree of specialisation becomes appropriate.

iv. Financial constraints. As available resources will be limited, any scheme adopted must be both realistically costed, and cost-effective according to cost/benefit analysis. Evaluation of the scheme will therefore be necessary.

v. Political constraints. Provision must be acceptable to both parents and public opinion in general if it is to obtain the necessary backing to survive.

vi. Pupil performance. If will not be sufficient to show that gifted pupils on special programmes do better academically, or in other respects, than average children of their own age; rather it must be demonstrated that they do better than could have been expected in the absence of special provision, or better than a control group of comparable ability who received no such provision. Evaluation should be both short-term and long-term.

vii. Social adjustment. Any scheme adopted must be considered in relation to the personal development of the gifted pupils.

viii. Effects on other pupils. Schemes must also be considered according to their effects, both academic and social, on the non-gifted school population.

ix. The effect to which the needs of the gifted children, as identified in the previous section, are met.

a.  Total segregation.

The word "segregation" has pejorative overtones and perhaps "differential grouping" would be a more acceptable phrase. Children can be grouped according to ability into separate schools or into separate classes within schools, both selective and non-selective (this practice is called "streaming"). These are both examples of "total segregation", although the latter method allows contact with average children at various times during the school day. On the other hand, children can be grouped into part-time special classes, or can attend extra-curricular instruction outside normal school hours, or even on Saturdays or during school holidays. These are all examples of "partial segregation".

First, we shall consider the use of special or selective schooling as a method of providing for the needs of gifted children. For a long time such children of secondary age were educated in Britain in grammar schools which contained some 20% of the school population. They did not cater in particular for the top 5% of the population, and, indeed, as has been noted earlier, grammar schools have not always provided very well for the needs of the exceptionally intelligent. Nevertheless, there are many reasons why grammar schools can adjust more effectively to these needs than the comprehensive school that have now largely replaced them.

Schools, specially designed to cater, amongst other things for exceptionally intelligent pupils, have also long been available in the independent sector. Public (boarding) schools, such as Eton and Winchester, admit large numbers of gifted boys by means of prestigious scholarship systems. At Eton, 70 King's Scholars, out of a total of about 1,200 boys are separately housed in the College. At Millfield, in Somerset, fees are even higher than at Eton, but by means of generous scholarships a number of pupils of non-wealthy backgrounds are admitted on the basis of high intellectual promise or ability. Direct grant schools have been particularly able to cater for the needs of the exceptionally able child of all social classes. By enjoying the pick of pupils  from across a large centre of population these schools have found themselves with considerable numbers of gifted children on their rolls. The best known of these are St.Paul's School and Dulwich College, both in London, King Edward's School, Birmingham, and Manchester Grammar School. They have maintained high academic standards and have provided over the years a pupil output of formidable quality.

A number of schools have also been set up in this country to nurture special talents. Educational provision for children with exceptional musical ability is made at a few specialist schools such as the Yehudi Menuhin School and Chetham's School, Manchester. Wells Cathedral School caters for  few gifted string players, and Pimlico Comprehensive School, under the control of the I.L.E.A., admits each year a half form of entry of pupils selected for their musical ability. The child who shows outstanding promise as a dancer can be awarded a place at the Royal Ballet School, while Millfield gives scholarships for children of outstanding athletic prowess. Such schools provide a thorough academic education as well as specialised instruction.

The traditional selective school, whether in the public or independent sector has obvious advantages for the education of the gifted. Although not catering specifically for them, the streaming and setting practices common to such schools ensure that the top 2.5 or 5% should be able to receive an academic programme appropriate to their abilities. Selective schools are also likely to attract the necessary numbers of highly qualified teachers that are essential if gifted children are to receive the necessary stimulation. In addition, selective schools can provide the range of academic subjects appropriate to the top 5% of the school population but which comprehensive schools are increasingly unable to offer at sixth form level or below. One is thinking in particular here of the separate sciences, modern languages other than French, and the classical languages. The fact that grammar schools select the top 20% of the population, and independent schools a much wider range of ability, also ensures that the gifted 5% have plenty of opportunity to mix with children of lesser ability  - one doubts if social adjustment really requires close contact with the whole ability range.

The existence of grammar schools and the use of scholarships to independent or direct grant schools where exceptional talent was involved provided an administratively and educationally satisfactory solution to most of the problems thrown up by giftedness. However, in Britain the political trends have swung dramatically against the selective school in the course of the past decade. 80% of secondary school pupils are now being educated in comprehensive schools, the direct grant is being phased out, and local education authorities have recently been forbidden to take up places for bright pupils in independent schools. It is felt by many that selective schools are socially divisive, and that the advantage of a few is paid for by the majority of children, who will fail to reach their potential due to feelings of inferiority that are the result of failure in the secondary school selection process. How true these criticisms are is highly debatable, but it must be said that unless the pendulum swings back towards the principle of selection, political constraints will make it almost impossible for the needs of the gifted to be met in the traditional selective school. Is any form of selective school possible in these circumstances? In searching for an answer to this question it would be instructive to look at selective schools in other countries.

Interesting examples of selective schools are to be found in both North America and Russia. The United States have a long tradition of comprehensive schooling, but some selective schools are to be found, particularly in New York. Hunter College Elementary School takes children of ages 8-11, admitting them on a competitive basis with a minimum of 130 IQ; many pupils are from backgrounds of low socio-economic status. New York also has a number of specialised high schools for children of talent. Stuyvesant High School, Brooklyn Technical School and The Bronx High School of Science offer a curriculum weighted towards science and mathematics, while the The High School of Music and Art and the High School of Performing Arts take pupil with high aptitudes in these areas. All children accepted in these school are expected to be strong in all-round achievement as well. The Russian educational system is of particular interest to those who believe in special schools for the gifted. Although schooling is based on a system of neighbourhood comprehensives, the Russians practise more intensive selection for special schools than any western country, believing the absence of selection to be a waste of the nation's most valuable resources. Children who are exceptionally gifted are provided for in two ways. Many of the neighbourhood schools are biassed towards particular subjects from the age of eight onwards. In Moscow, for instance, 68 schools specialise in mathematics. At the same time, children in rural areas who are exceptionally gifted in mathematics attend the four university boarding schools from the age of fifteen or sixteen. to do a special two-year course. Recruitment depends on high academic achievement at the local eight-year school (8-16), an entrance test based on mathematics and physics, and an oral examination. These boarding schools are sited at Moscow, Leningrad, Kiev and Novosibirsk, but cater exclusively for children from rural areas. Urban pupils are differentiated by ability after the age of sixteen and are able to study on specialised courses as in this country.

Selective schools undoubtedly achieve high standards, although it has yet to be demonstrated decisively that their pupils do better than they would have done if they had attended non-selective schools. The research of Christie and Griffin (1970) (See Footnote 32) tends to the view that they do not, and it is possible that the stratification systems in selective schools inhibit the performance of those in the lower part of the hierarchy, who would nevertheless have abilities which would put them at the top of a comprehensive school. It is also alleged by some that, according to the "self-fulfilling prophecy" principle, the average child performs less well when the bright children are removed, but the evidence for this is hotly disputed. It seems probable that moderately bright, average and academically dull children may well be happier working with others like themselves than when they are in comprehensive or mixed-ability groups, when the very bright always get the top marks and most of the teacher's approval. In any case these problems of "self-concept", "expectation level", and "self-fulfilling prophecy" are not intractable; if they are faced squarely, the careful and sensitive treatment of pupils can overcome the spin-off effects of selection.

With regard to the secondary schooling of the gifted child, the key factor is probably what C.P.Snow (See Footnote 33) has called the "critical mass". According to the D.E.S.' pamphlet "Gifted Children and their Education": "The central problem at the secondary level turns upon the optimal density of the critical mass. If this is too low, the gifted child might suffer from a lack of stimulation; if it is too high, and formal and/or informal stratification occurs, the achievements of some of these gifted pupils would be lower than they might have been in a critical mass of less density."

 However, the argument that selective schools are socially divisive remains, and is difficult to refute. A less divisive, yet clearly successful plan for separate schooling for the gifted is the "Major Works" classes plan which has been operating in Cleveland, Ohio, since 1922. These classes cater for elementary (age9-12) and secondary pupils with IQs of 125 upwards. "Major Works" centres are established in any school with a sufficient number of gifted children over any age range of 2-3 years. If a school has insufficient numbers to form a class, their gifted pupils are "bussed" to a centre in another school. There are three junior and three senior high schools in Cleveland, to which graduates of the "Major Works" elementary classes are directed, and in these the programme continues. Similar schemes to this are in operation in the Canadian cities of Saskatoon and London, Ontario. These arrangements have much to recommend then. They only involve small numbers, say 60-90 a year in a medium-sized city, rather than 20% as in British secondary selection, and thus other schools suffer little because the cream of the pupils has been skimmed off. It has not led to the  competitiveness which vitiated secondary selection in this country; nor can it be considered as elitist, since pupils in the "Major Works" classes have daily contact with others in the school, in which their centres are located, because they participate in the regular sporting, craft, and club activities. A particular advantage of the "Major Works" scheme is its low cost. No extra school buildings or teachers are required beyond what would be needed for the same students in other schools, while teachers who specialise in teaching gifted pupils are employed more efficiently in these centres than in schools where only a few gifted children are present. In addition the special classes make use of the libraries, laboratory, workshops and audio-visual equipment of the schools in which they are housed, although, of course, some extra materials are needed. If secondary selection of the traditional kind is rendered impossible for political reasons, the educational administrator would be advised to consider very strongly the setting up of a scheme for gifted children along the lines of the "Major Works" plan.

The second type of total segregation is that of homogeneous grouping, or streaming, within the school. The advantages of, and objections to, this practice are very sidualised basis. imilar to those put forward in regard to segregation by schools. Children in the middle and bottom streams may have their self-esteem and, hence, their motivation, impaired, while those towards the bottom of the top group may have their performance adversely affected by their relatively low marks. Streaming is particularly open to the charge that its classification tends to rigidify, that is, it becomes increasingly difficult for children to switch streams due to their different curricula and pace of progress. Early streaming in the primary schools at the age of seven is particularly unwise, as it consolidates the initial advantages of middle-class children, an advantage which schools should at least be seeking to reduce. It would seem sensible to wait until the children reach the age of eleven or twelve before classifying all of them into homogeneous groups, although as early as nine some sort of selection of the very bright for special programmes should be practised. At the age of eleven it seems reasonable to suppose that the great advantages of modifying the content and methods of instruction to each level of ability will outweigh any psychological disadvantages that may stem from classification. As has been indicated above, streaming in selective schools of the traditional type is likely to be more helpful to the gifted; streaming within the comprehensive school will inevitably be less so. If a comprehensive is divided into three streams, the top groups will include children of the range of IQ 107 and upwards, which will inevitably lead to an exceptionally wide range of ability, while the unsatisfactory practice of packing top stream classes in order to ease discipline problems, or provide more assistance, lower down in the age-group concerned, will only serve to increase this range. The gifted child will inevitably be inadequately accommodated in this situation, unless learning is carried out on an individualised basis. However, it must be stated that any streaming, however wide the range of ability per stream, is an advantage, if only because it reduces significantly the complexity of the learning situation that the teacher must manage. Even more advantageous is the practice of  "setting", common to many British secondary schools, by which pupils are regrouped for different academic subjects. While this creates a plethora of time-tabling difficulties, it provides more accurately for variations in ability between the different dimensions of the curriculum, and is more flexible than the practice of allocating pupils to high or lower groups for every subject. Moreover, "setting" blurs the rigid classification which some believe to be harmful to pupil motivation.

b.  Partial segregation.

Another method of assisting gifted children is that of partial segregation, i.e. part-time special classes for gifted children who are educated, for the most part, in non-selective schools. These schemes of partial segregation involve children of any age, and are based either on special classes inside the school or on visits to other educational centres for this purpose. In this country, these special programmes are few at present, but they are growing in number.

Most special programmes held during school hours are designed for primary school pupils. A pilot scheme was run by Sydney Bridges at Brentwood College of Education, Essex, in the 1960s. A pilot scheme was run by Sydney Bridges at Brentwood College of Education, Essex, in the 1960s. Gifted pupils from local primary attended the college for half a day each week in order to undertake a programme of academic and creative studies under the guidance of college staff and students (See Footnote 34). Following this experiment, the North-East division of Essex C.C. set up four classes for intellectually gifted children in 1970. Children are withdrawn from their normal primary school lessons to attend these classes, which meet twice weekly. The group sizes are set at between four and eight pupils. In West Sussex, an "Extended Activities Group" has been set up, and this offers a special programme to fourteen children from nine primary schools in one area. The aims of these programmes vary. Sometimes the emphasis is on covering the major subjects, mathematics and English, in greater depth; sometimes, as in the case of the "Extended Activities Group", the emphasis is more on special interests and enrichment of the curriculum. In fact, there is no chance of these part-time programmes speeding up the academic progress of gifted pupils as most of their work is inevitably done in their regular schools. Only where the specialist classes are held in the schools themselves can the rate of progress be advanced.

A good example of partial segregation within the school itself is the Colefax Plan, operated at Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Here children of IQ 130 and upwards are segregated for part of the day in special "workshops". The school morning begins with classes in which all children participate, but in the middle of the morning the gifted go their workshops for classes in which there is an emphasis on critical and analytical thinking. Although Colefax is an elementary school, such a plan as this might be particularly suited to a secondary comprehensive school in this country. A comprehensive with an annual intake of, say, 300 pupils could expect to have seven or eight children with an IQ of 130+ in each year, a sufficient number for the school to provide the special classes within its own walls. In fact, the greater distances between secondary schools make common programmes for gifted secondary pupils from a number of schools less feasible, and this reminds us that the schemes of part-time segregation such as in North-East Essex and West Sussex are only possible in urban areas.

An alternative or supplement to the schemes of partial segregation discussed above are extra-curricular courses run on weekends or in the holidays. These courses can be residential and may cover a wide range of  subjects and activities. In the Canadian city of Toronto, special Saturday courses are held for about 100 gifted pupils of ages 11-14. Many different subjects are offered, e.g. computer science, philosophy, journalism, and archaeology. In the United States, residential courses in the holidays are very popular, and cover a vast range of interests. They are held in schools and universities and can provide opportunities for teachers to undertake in-service training with gifted pupils. In this country about a quarter of local education authorities provide Saturday classes (See Appendix 1), but this is mainly in music. Other authorities, such as Somerset, are setting up "Saturday clubs" for gifted children. More academic in orientation are the the recently started special residential courses for gifted children attending Lancashire schools. These courses, catering for 50-60 pupils at a time, were set up in 1976 to cover science, mathematics and modern languages during the school holidays and weekends. They have proved so popular that additional courses in English language and literature are to be added in 1977-78, and this Conservative controlled authority has funded courses for the gifted to the extent of £250,000 in that year in order to encourage top ability children to improve still further their academic potential.

A considerable range of measures, involving either total or partial segregation, are available to provide for the special needs of gifted children. Those measures which involve total segregation are very difficult to arrange in the present climate of political thinking. There are many types of partial segregation which can be run in conjunction with mixed ability schooling, but one doubts if they are a satisfactory substitute for more regular provision.

c.  Acceleration.

Acceleration is another general method of providing for the educational needs of gifted pupils; it may be an alternative to, but it can be also be combined with, the method of segregation. Acceleration means promoting gifted children to higher classes more rapidly than is usual. It is, in fact, a form of grouping in that it implies differentiation by mental, rather than chronological, age. Usually it involves missing a year's work or "grade skipping", as the Americans call it. It is not a common practice in the United States, and, as has been seen, is probably becoming less common in this country, where changes in the transfer age from primary to secondary schools, and divided schemes of secondary schooling have complicated the issue.

Many teachers and educationalists disapprove of acceleration, believing that it harms the social adjustment of the child. They feel that the gifted child may not be sufficiently mature, either physically or emotionally, to work with those older than himself. In fact, however, Terman concluded from the evidence of his study of gifted children in California (See Footnote 35) that not only do accelerated pupils tend to maintain their academic position fully but that they show no more social maladjustment than bright children who have not been accelerated. On the contrary, there is some evidence (See Footnote 36) that bright children who are held back with their coevals are less well adjusted than those who are accelerated. Furthermore, when one considers the enormous differences in maturation amongst children grouped according to chronological age, psychological objections to acceleration appear very weak. It is more likely that official reluctance to accelerate is related to administrative convenience, although it is significant that schools are often more ready to allow children to repeat a year's work.

Acceleration does, however, cause some difficulties, and it is often an imperfect solution to the problem of giftedness. It may create problems for teachers and pupils in making up work which has been missed, and can lead to frustration, if a child who has been accelerated in the primary school is not accepted early at secondary level. It provides no real answer to the problems posed by the exceptionally gifted, or of those talented in one or two areas only. Three methods of acceleration designed to overcome some of these problems will now be briefly considered. elescoping"

The first of these is the practice of  "express" or "fast" streaming, known in the United States as "grade telescoping". In this country the practice is generally confined to secondary schools, but was probably more common in grammar schools than it is now in comprehensives. What it means, in effect, is organising a class of bright pupils to take their "O" Levels at the age of fifteen, and thus to progress to the sixth form a year early. In the USA "grade telescoping" occurs not only in junior high schools but in elementary schools, but in neither case is it common. In Britain its applicability to primary schools would depend on whether authorities were prepared to allow groups of pupils to move to secondary schools a year early. Although the forming of "express" streams has been quite common, it does not really cater well for the exceptionally gifted pupil, nor for the one whose ability is high in some areas but only average in others. "Expressing" is even becoming less popular in independent schools. Although bright pupils in such schools often take some "O" Levels at fifteen, they are thereby encouraged to take more at sixteen, and "A" Levels, as usual, at eighteen. By not "expressing" pupils it is no doubt expected that they will obtain more "O" Levels and better grades at "A" Level - important considerations in an increasingly examination-conscious age.

The second type of acceleration worthy of our attention is that of "continuous progress", although the individualisation of learning that this entails is appropriate to children of all abilities. It involves the division of schoolwork into a sequence of units or "modules", through which children move at their own pace. The system is spreading in elementary schools in the USA and Canada, and it has many advocates in this country.
However, the details of organising such schemes are formidable, and the open plan schools which they require are not to the taste of all. Teachers do little class teaching, and concentrate on individual or small group tutoring, and writing the courses of instruction. Pupils work at their own pace in open plan centres, and  follow alternative paths depending on their ability and rate of progress. Sometimes the organisation of continuous progress planning is computerised, but this computer managed instruction (CMI) is very costly. Although, in theory, this this type of schooling really does seem to provide an answer  to the problems of the gifted pupil, the cost of its introduction for all pupils in this country would seem prohibitive. However, programmed learning units might be of value for use with gifted pupils in conventionally organised schools where such pupils had far outstripped their contemporaries.

The third practice connected with acceleration is peculiar to American schools, and is known as "advanced placement". This means that very able pupils are able to do university work while still at school. Although not entering university until the normal age, they can obtain exemption from certain first year courses. The "credits" which they receive while still at school enable them to take their degrees earlier. The Advanced Placement Scheme is a very popular practice in the United States, but it is not really appropriate in this country as our university work is not similarly organised around set courses and credits, and in any case our universities are flexible about the age of entry.

These various methods of acceleration - grade skipping, grade telescoping, continuous progress and dvanced placement - have their advantages. The chief merit of acceleration for the gifted child is that he can be given challenging work commensurate with his ability rather than his age. The perceived disadvantages principally concern the social adjustment of the accelerated child. If acceleration is not considered suitable for the gifted child, then it must be considered how else a school can compensate him.

d.  Enrichment.

The final method of dealing with the educational needs of gifted children is covered by the word "enrichment". The term is so vague that it can be applied to almost anything, but, in so far as it concerns our  purpose, it means providing experiences which the average or below average pupil would lack the time, inclination or the ability to understand or benefit from. There are two basic types of enrichment. There is enrichment by depth, whereby a pupil follows a subject in greater depth, and enrichment by breadth, whereby he pursues additional related tasks, which often require work of special quality. As the former type really signifies acceleration, it is the latter which is of distinctive interest. Enrichment by breadth is the method used to occupy children in a heterogeneous or mixed ability classroom, and it is the only method of catering for gifted pupils which is open to schools that reject both acceleration and segregation. It generally involves the processes of individualisation which we encountered under continuous progress schemes, but in this context the aim is not to accelerate the gifted pupil but to "move him along sideways". A variety of teaching methods are appropriate here, but the most common are the setting of special assignments, projects, and subsidiary study programmes. Sometimes, as under the celebrated Dalton Plan, children can be given considerable choice as to what tasks they undertake.  This method of providing for the needs of gifted children involves teachers in considerable preparation: they have to compile an extensive repertoire of materials, programmed units and audio-visual aids.

Enrichment is probably the method of catering for gifted pupils which is most in vogue with educationalists. In theory at least, it makes possible the teaching of such children without separating them from their average contemporaries. Unfortunately, enrichment is not in practical terms altogether a realistic concept, and it probably creates as many problems as it solves. For, when enrichment for gifted pupils is written into the aims of a school, the mechanics of this process are very rarely addressed. What enrichment in fact occurs may be very different from what theory has envisaged. The harassed teacher, the majority of whose pupils in a mixed ability class will fall into an IQ range of 80-120, may have little time, and possibly little interest, in devoting much of his effort into preparing materials and work programmes for one or two gifted pupils. Many teachers will probably content themselves with setting the gifted child additional work at the same  level rather than tasks which are intellectually more demanding. Ogilvie's criticisms of the practice of much of the project method of teaching in primary schools is worth citing once again. It is probably unrealistic to expect more of the majority of teachers unless more resources are available and the teacher/pupil ratio is significantly reduced.

At this point, however, it must in all fairness be acknowledged that when an enrichment scheme is correctly operated by dedicated teachers that it is an exciting way of dealing with gifted children in primary schools, and of course it does so in a politically uncontroversial manner. Considerable interest has been shown in producing work for gifted pupils in this situation, and the programmes of enrichment which have been used in the segregated classes which has been considered are relevant here. Of particular value has been the work carried out by Bridges at Brentwood and at Millfield, while the purpose of the Tempest research class at Southport was to develop curriculum materials which might be useful to teachers with one or two gifted pupils in a normal primary school (7-11) class. More recently, in 1973, the Schools Council approved a grant to Dr.Ogilvie, the Principal of Northampton College of Education for the purpose of developing learning units for gifted children within the age range of 7-10. It is regrettable that no such work has been done for older pupils. Where the pioneering work of Bridges, Tempest and Ogilvie is intelligently applied the more attractive and feasible will enrichment methods become.

On the other hand, it must also be accepted that enrichment, if adequately implemented, is a more expensive method of providing for the needs of gifted children than acceleration or segregation. Schools will be reluctant to purchase expensive curriculum materials for use by a very few pupils only, and particular teaching expertise in the field of gifted children will not be economically employed in the average comprehensive or primary school. It must also be recognised that the older the gifted pupil becomes the harder it will be to provide for his needs adequately on the basis of enrichment schemes in mixed ability classrooms. By the time a gifted pupil has reached the age of 14-16, his academic needs could be well beyond the capacity of many comprehensive school teachers to manage. The recent level of anxiety about how well gifted children fare in comprehensives has been fully vindicated by the findings of  the recent report of HM Inspectorate of Education.

Enrichment appeals to many because it utilises the practice of that "individualisation" of teaching and learning increasingly advocated today. The chief recommendation put forward by Ogilvie in his survey of gifted children in primary schools is the need to maximise individualisation in education. He argues that conventional schooling involves both "artificial ceilings on achievement" and "artificial constraints in the curriculum", and that these, by minimising individual differences, inhibit the emergence and development of giftedness. Arguing that "The more disparate the activities, and the larger the number available, the less likely it is that talent will, remain undetected and undeveloped", he advocates a "cafeteria" or "smorgasbord" curriculum in which pupil sare given considerable choice as to what they study. Furthermore, he asserts that "Problems of giftedness form a part of the total of those concerned with individualisation". The implication of this is that the need to individualise learning as a means of making special provision for the gifted should be viewed as only part of the need to individualise learning for all pupils. There is certainly some merit in this point of view, and some work advocating this approach has been published in recent years (See Footnote 37), but the difficulties and costs of a universal conversion to it would be immense, and it would not be reasonable for special provision for the gifted to be neglected until individualisation for all can be afforded. Furthermore, one doubts whether wholesale conversion is appropriate, since conventional classroom teaching is not only less costly but also has some definite social advantages, including the inspiration which arises from shared experience and the motivation provided by competition.

The applications of enrichment therefore seem limited. In primary schools, where the emphasis is on a broad general education, gifted children's needs could be well catered for under a system of enrichment, based on individualised approaches to learning. However, in spite of the wishes of many of its practitioners, such enrichment in the primary school is quite compatible with acceleration and partial segregation. In the secondary school it would seem to be both an inadequate and, in terms of cost, an unrealistic method of achieving the necessary provision for the gifted.

Conclusion.

A thorough review of existing ways of educating gifted children has been made. Recommendations as to the most appropriate ones for the state sector will now be offered.

In primary schools, the practice of providing for gifted pupils by enrichment methods is to be approved. Primary classes should not be streamed to begin with, since any attempt to differentiate by ability during these early years would probably inhibit as many cases of giftedness as it would promote. However, from the age of nine, some selection should be possible. Acceleration in individual cases seems desirable, and methods of partial segregation would be most valuable. Schemes such as those pioneered in Essex and West Sussex are especially recommended for study, but the extra-curricular provision of weekend and holiday courses should be carefully considered too. Unfortunately, it must be accepted that few measures of partial segregation can cater for gifted children from rural areas. The "Major Works" plan is particularly recommended; although it involves selection, it is not costly, and does not lead to total segregation. However, it too is only applicable to urban areas.

Recommendation for secondary schools are circumscribed by the fact that in the very near future all the secondary schools will be comprehensive. It is desirable, however, that streaming and setting are applied in comprehensives, and that in these circumstances both acceleration and enrichment methods are employed. The formation of express streams is not, on balance, to be recommended. Partial segregation of the gifted within individual schools, on the lines of the "Major Works" (high school) and "Colefax" plans would be valuable. Such schemes would only generate sufficient numbers of pupils to be operable in centres of population, and it is probable that gifted pupils from rural areas would be disadvantaged once more. Saturday classes and holiday courses would also help in providing further facilities, but to provide extra-curricular arrangements alone would seem an almost apologetic method of helping the gifted.

One doubts, however, if any of the methods described above would adequately answer the needs of the exceptionally gifted child, i.e. the child of IQ 160+, especially if he comes from a country district, Lord Snow and Sir Cyril Burt have advocated the formation of special schools for the very gifted, akin to the state boarding schools in Russia, but there is something almost Orwellian about this concept, and it is difficult to believe that the social adjustment of a child would not suffer if he attended such an institution. Yet, if entry was postponed until 15-16, much valuable time might be lost, and adequate provision for high level giftedness cannot wait until then. In spite of some misgivings, it might therefore be wise to found one or two experimental schools for exceptionally gifted pupils of secondary age. Alternatively, such pupils could be awarded scholarships to independent schools, such as Millfield, which have special facilities for them. In the same way the exceptionally gifted pupil of primary age, particularly if he came from a rural area, could be sent to a preparatory school with similar facilities. The use of independent schools is not however possible in the present political climate.

Political considerations apart, it does seem that, for gifted pupils at least, the former system of selective secondary schooling has much to recommend it. Streaming and setting within such schools enables the gifted to be taught in homogeneous groups, a practice both intellectually stimulating and economically efficient. At the same time, the gifted pupil would, in such a school, receive sufficient contact with other children of lesser ability for his social adjustment to be unimpaired. Selective secondary schooling appears on most calculations  to be a more satisfactory solution to the problems of giftedness than comprehensive schools with hole-and-corner compensations at extra-curricular courses during holidays and weekends. Finally, it is submitted that it is in selective schools that there exists the best opportunity of creating that "critical mass" in which the abilities and personalities of the gifted child can most fully be developed.

FOOTNOTES:

1. Cyril Burt, "The Gifted Child", Hodder and Stoughton (1975).

2. C. Burt, "Is intelligence normally distributed?" Brit. J. Ed. Psych. 16 (1963).

3. Eric Ogilvie, "Gifted Children in Primary School," School Council Research Studies. Macmillan (1973).

4. "Gifted Children in Middle and Comprehensive Secondary Schools," H.M.S.O. (1977).

5. Sydney Bridges, "IQ-150," Priory Press (1973).

6. C.W. Pegnato and J.W. Birch, "Locating gifted children in junior high schools - a comparison of                 methods," Exceptional Children, 25 (1959).

7. L.S. Hollingworth, "Children who tested above 180 IQ"; Stanford Binet: Origin and development," World  Book Co. (1942).

8. M.L.K. Pringle, "Able Misfits," Longman (1970).

9. See especially J.B. Shields, "The Gifted Child," NFER (1968); M.L.K.Pringle. op.cit.: E.M. Hitchfield, "In Search of Promise," Longman (1973); Eric Ogilvie, op.cit; Sydney Bridges, op.cit.; P.Rowlands, "Gifted Children and their problems," Dent (1974); Cyril Burt, op. cit.; P.E.Vernon et alia, "The Psychology and Education of Gifted Children," Methuen (1977).

10. See S.A. Bridges, "Gifted Children and the Brentwood Experiment," Pitman (1969); N.R.Tempest, "Teaching Clever Children, 7-11," Routledge (1974); S.A. Bridges, "Gifted Children and the Millfield Experiment," Pitman (1975).

11. E.Hoyle and J.Wilkes, "Gifted Children and their Education," D.E.S. (1975).

12. See L.L.Thurstone, "Primary Mental Abilities," D.E.S. (1975).

13. P.E.Vernon, "The Structure of Human Abilities," Methuen (1961).

14. J.W.Getzels and P.W.Jackson, "Creativity and Intelligence," Wiley (1962).

15. L.Hudson, "Contrary Imaginations," Methuen (1966).

16. L.M.Terman et alia, "Genetic Studies of Genius", Volumes I-V, Stanford University Press (1925-59).

17. R.F.De Haan and R.J.Havighurst, "Educationally Gifted Children," University of Chicago Press (1961).

18. J.J.Gallagher, "Teaching the gifted child," Allyn and Bacon (1963).

19. M.J.Gold, "Education of the Intellectually Gifted," Merrill (1965).

20. R.A.Martinson and C.M.Lessinger, "Problems in the identification of intellectually gifted pupils," Exceptionally Children, 26 (1960).

21. See Footnote 2.

22. J.Cornwell, "An Orally Presented Group Test of Intelligence for Juniors", Methuen (1952).

23. See Footnote 10.

24. See Footnote 6.

25. See Footnote 17.

26. P.E.Vernon et alia, op.cit. See Footnote 9.

27. E.P.Torrance, "Rewarding Creative Behaviour", Prentice-Hall (1965).

28. See especially G.M.Hilldreth, "Introduction to the Gifted," McGraw-Hill (1966); and J.S.Renzulli and R.K.Hartman, "Scale for Rating Behavioural Characteristics of Superior Students," Exceptional Children, 38 (1971).

29. S.R.Laycock, "Gifted Children: a handbook for the classroom teacher," Copp-Clark (1957).

30. See Footnote 11.

31. R.B.Catell and H.J.Butcher, "The Prediction of Achievement and Creativity," Bobbs-Merill (1968).

32. T.Christie and A.Griffin. ("The examination and achievements of highly selective schools," Ed. Res. 12, 2)
 
33. C.P.Snow, "Elitism ad excellence," New Science Teacher, 12 (1968).

34. See Footnote 10.

35. L.M.Terman, op.cit. Vol. IV. "The Gifted Child Grows Up," (1947).

36. D.A.Worcester, "The Education of Children of Above-Average Mentality," Nebraska University Press (1956).

37. See especially G.Taylor, "The Teacher as Manager", NCET (1970); L.C.Taylor, "Resources for Learning", Penguin (1971); and "Resource-based Learning in British Secondary Schools," in Br. J.Ed.Tech. No.2. Vol. 3 (1972).

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

BRIDGES, S.A. (1973): "IQ-150." London, Priory Press.

BURT, C. (1975): "The Gifted Child." London, Hodder and Stoughton.

FRENCH, J.L. (Ed) (1966) "Educating the Gifted." New York, Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

HILDRETH, G.M. (1968) "Introduction to the Gifted." New York, McGraw-Hill.

HOYLE, E. & WILKS, J. (1975) "Gifted Children in Primary Schools." London, D.E.S.

OGILVIE, E. (1970) "Gifted Children in Primary Schools." London, Macmillan.

TEMPEST, N.R. (1974) "Teaching Clever Children, 7-11." London. Routledge and Kegan Paul.

VERNON, P.E., ADAMSON, G. & VERNON, D.F. (1977) "The Psychology and Education of Gifted Children." London, Methuen.

APPENDICES:

APPENDIX 1.  PROVISION BY LEAs

The following figures are taken from the results of Ogilvie's questionnaire to LEAs published in Chapter 6 of "Gifted Children in Primary Schools", pp. 129-37.

A.  Arrangements for ensuring effective recognition:

Item:                                Provision:           No provision:         Qualified reply:      Unclear:      
Guidance to teachers:            

     Totals                              24                       96                           3                         14
        %                                 17.5                    70.1                        2.2                      10.2

Established referral system:    

      Totals                             36                       82                           9                          10
         %                                26.3                    59.9                        6.5                         7.3  

B.  Saturday morning classes:

                                      Provision:             No provision:        Qualified reply:          Unclear:

       Totals                           49                          43                        6                           37
          %                              35.7                       32.8                     4.4                        27.0

C.  The award of scholarships and exhibitions:

Item:                              Provision:              No provision:        Qualified reply:          Unclear:
Part-time:

      Totals                           50                           43                      11                            33
         %                              36.5                        31.4                     8.0                         24.1

Full-time:
       
      Totals                           69                            32                     11                             25
         %                              50.4                         23.4                    8.0                          18.2

D.  Enrichment classes in school hours:
                     
                                      Provision:              No provision:         Qualified reply:          Unclear:

      Totals                              6                         102                      2                              27
         %                                 4.5                        74.3                   1.5                           19.7

E.  Early admission to secondary schools:

                                     Provision:                No provision:         Qualified reply:         Unclear:

      Totals                          77                             37                        4                             19                
         %                             56.2                          27.0                     2.9                          13.9

APPENDIX 2.  THE INCIDENCE OF GIFTEDNESS

These figures are taken from tables calculated by Gilbert Peaker and published in "Gifted Children in Primary Schools", pp.12-13.

A.  The incidence of polymathic giftedness:

                     Coefficient of        Numbers of dimensions of giftedness:
                     correlation (r)        1      2      3      4      5      6      7      8

5.5%                 0.00                5.5   0.3                                                
gifted                 0.25                5.5   0.7   0.2                                        
                          0.50                5.5   1.4   0.6    0.3  0.2   0.2   0.1   0.1
1.8%                  0.00                1.8                                                        
gifted                  0.25                1.8   0.1                                                
                           0.50                1.8   0.3   0.1                                               

B.  The incidence of specific giftedness:

                                                    Numbers of  dimensions of giftedness:                              
                             r                      1        2        3        4        5        6        7        8            
      
5.5%                 0.00                    5.5   10.7   15.6   20.2   24.6   28.7   32.6    36.3
gifted                 0.25                    5.5   10.2    14.4  18.2    21.6   24.6   27.4   30.0
                         0.50                    5.5     9.6    12.9   15.6   18.0   20.0   21.9   23.5    
1.8%                 0.00                    1.8     3.5      5.3     7.0     8.6   10.3   11.9   13.4    
gifted                 0.25                   1.8     3.5      5.0     6.5     7.9     9.3   10.5   11.8    
                         0.50                    1.8     3.5      4.6      5.7    6.8     7.7    8.6      9.4      

APPENDIX 3.  THRESHOLD INTERRELATIONSHIPS

These figures are taken from "Gifted Children in Primary Schools", p.15.

A.  Creativity and intelligence correlations:

(Haddon)                                    (Ogilvie)                             (Yamamoto)
IQ                     r                         IQ                 r                   IQ             r      
70-135             0.480                  70-140         0.540
115+                0.076                                                          130+         0.04
100+                0.164                108-140         0.195           110-130    0.08
100-                 0.512                  70-107         0.492           100-          0.31

B.  Intelligence and attainment correlations:

(Entwistle)       Boys             Perf.              Girls           Perf.
Mean IQ         VRQ(r)          IQ(r)             VRQ(r)      IQ(r)
115                 0.434            0.220            0.515         0.286
  85                 0.592            0.446            0.557         0.345

References:

Haddon, F.A., and Lytton, H., "Teaching Approach and the Development of Divergent Thinking Abilities in Primary Schools", Br. J. Ed.Psych. Vol.38. No.2, 1968.

Ogilvie, E., "Creativity, Intelligence, and Concept Development", Ph.D. thesis, Southampton University, 1970.

Yamamoto, K., "Thresholds of Intelligence in Academic Achievement of Highly Creative Students", J. Experimental Education. Vol.32, No.4, 1964.

Entwistle, N.J. and Welsh, J., "Correlates of School Attainment at Different Ability Levels", Br. J. Ed.Psych. 1969.


APPENDIX 4. THE INDICATORS OF GIFTEDNESS

The following table contains the results of Ogilvie's questionnaire to teachers on this subject ("Gifted Children in Primary Schools", p.70):

Item                                                                                                                                %    

 1.  Display of extrordinary initiative.                                                                                 48
 2.  Intense curiosity.                                                                                                         65
 3.  Day dreaming.                                                                                                            18
 4.  Delinquent behaviour.                                                                                                   1
 5.  Divergent behaviour.                                                                                                   45
 6.  Memorising reams of poetry, etc.                                                                                  8
 7.  Inability to understand aggression in others.                                                                   6
 8.  Imaginative writing.                                                                                                     56
 9.  Rapid reading.                                                                                                            48
10. Wide vocabulary.                                                                                                       65
11. Extraordinary perseverance.                                                                                       36
12. Extreme independence.                                                                                              36
13. Extreme unpopularity.                                                                                                  5
14. High achievement test scores.                                                                                    38                                                                                          
16. High creativity test scores.                                                                                         21
17. Rejection of school work.                                                                                           6
18. Exasperation in the face of constraint.                                                                        28
19. Exceptional physical characteristics.                                                                            9
20. Any others.*                                                                                                             21

*N.B. Those characteristics most frequently added:  selection and  discrimination; creation of  images and perception of relationships; general enfacts; desire to excel; thusiasm and co-operation; "butterfly" behaviour due to rapid absorption of facts; desire to excel; exceptional energy.  

APPENDIX 5.  GIFTED CHILDREN: A TEACHER'S CHECKLIST (OF CHARACTERISTICS)

Devised by S.R.Laycock and published  in Gifted Children and their Education", D.E.S. (1975) pp.10-11.

1.   Possess superior powers of reasoning, of dealing with abstractions, of generalising from specific facts, of understanding meanings, and of seeing into relationships.
2.   Have great intellectual curiosity.
3.   Learn easily and readily.*
4.   Have a wide range of interests.
5.  Have a broad attention-span that enables them to concentrate on, and persevere in, solving problems and pursuing interests.
6.  Are superior in the quantity and quality of vocabulary as compared with other children of their own age.
7.   Have ability to do independent work effectively.
8.   Have learned to read early (often well before school age).*
9.   Exhibit keen powers of persuasion.
10. Show initiative and originality in intellectual work.
11. Show alertness and quick response to new ideas.
12. Are able to memorise quickly.
13. Have great interest in the nature of man and the universe.
14. Possess unusual imagination.
15. Follow complex directions easily.
16. Are rapid readers.*
17. Have several hobbies.
18. Have reading interests which cover a wide range of subjects.
19. Make frequent and effective use of the library.*
20. Are superior in mathematics, particularly in problem solving.*

*N.B. A child showing most characteristics on the checklist, but not those starred, is likely to be a gifted child who is under-achieving educationally.

APPENDIX 6.  PARENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE CONCERNING GIFTED CHILDREN

The following questions were included in a questionnaire for circulation to parents in a Canadian city in order to provide information about gifted children. (See P.E.Vernon et al., "The Psychologyistica and Education of Gifted Children" (1977), pp. 110-12.

1. What are the characteristics of this child which makes you think that he or she is much above average in ability? Please check any of the following that apply, and add others if you wish.
a. Spoke fluently, and used difficult words, by three years old.
b. Learned to read at 4 to 5 years old.
c. Showed an intense, continuing interest in some special area from an early age.
d. Shows exceptional understanding of advanced topics and ideas.
e. Shows remarkable knowledge of many topics, and a very god memory.
f. Shows unusual imagination and original ideas in his leisure time activities.
g. Shows exceptional initiative and independence in games or hobbies, or doing things for himself.
h. Says that his school work is boring because it is too easy.
i. Always gets very high grades at school.

2. What do you do to encourage him or her to develop their special talents and interests?.
a. Supply more advanced books.
b. Supply scientific, model-making, painting, or other equipment.
c. Encourage use of the school library.
d. Arrange for music lessons.
e. Family excursions to museums or other places of interest.
f. Encourage him to watch serious TV programmes.
g. Give help with homework.
h. Teach him or her more advanced maths, science, foreign language, etc. than is available at school.
i. Go to theatres, concerts, or good films.
j. Discuss political or world news with him or her.

APPENDIX 7.  EFFECTIVENESS AND EFFICIENCY OF SCREENING PROCEDURES

The following table shows the results of Pegnato's research at a Pittsburgh junior high school (See J.L.French, "Educating the Gifted", p.77).

Screening                             No. selected by                  No. identified          Effectiveness*     Efficiency*
methods                             screening methods                 as gifted by                 %                        %
                                                                                       Binet IQ 130+

Teacher judgment                      154                                       41                      45.1                   26.6
Honour roll                                371                                       67                      73.6                   18.0
Creativity                                   137                                      14                       15.5                   10.2
Student Council                           82                                       13                       14.3                   15.8
Maths achievement                    179                                      50                       56.0                   27.9    
Group intelligence tests:
   Cut-off point IQ 115               450                                      84                        92.3                  18.7
   Cut-off point IQ 120               240                                      65                        71.4                  27.1                  
   Cut-off point IQ 125               105                                      40                        43.9                  38.1
   Cut-off point IQ 130                 36                                      20                        21.9                  55.5
Group achievement tests            335                                      72                        79.2                  21.5
   Total                                       781

*N.B. Effectiveness: Percentage of Gifted Located; Total Gifted = 91.
*N.B. Efficiency: Ratio of No. Selected by Screening to No. Identified as Gifted in Percentage.