What should gifted students learn?

By Iwan Pranoto

BANDUNG (JP): If we look at data on the distribution of students in the 1996/1997 school year, we can see that the group consisting of elementary school students was the majority.

It was 61 percent. For comparison, there were less than three million university students in that academic year. Or, roughly, 29 million elementary students.

According to the Ministry of Education, there is one gifted student for every 10 students. It means there were about three million gifted students in the elementary level alone. It is definitely not a small number.

Now most of us are likely to believe a myth that gifted students are easier to teach than other students. Moreover, the myth goes on to say, gifted students can be successful in school and become smart without any significant attention.

That myth is not exactly true. According to one report, in 1997, 25 percent of gifted students dropped out of school in the United States. Certainly, this outnumbered the percentage of ordinary students dropping out of school.

Therefore, we learn that gifted students do need special attention as much as weak ones. We have to provide equal amounts of attention to teach the gifted ones as the weak ones. This, I believe, everybody agrees with.

If we believe that we have to provide some special attention to gifted students, we will ask: "How can we provide quality education for them?" This is, I think, the issue many educators debate.

One school of thought proposes an idea to shorten the education process for them. In other words, gifted students are given the opportunity to complete their formal education faster than stated.

This idea does not have solid arguments supporting it. After all, is finishing senior high school in two years better than finishing it in three years? If one student can shorten his or her study time in elementary school to, say, four years, so what?

Beside the age reasons, there are no strong arguments behind this idea.

Another school of thought proposes to enrich the materials in the standard curriculum. Its proponents reason that gifted students can learn so fast, that they can handle more materials without any problems.

The fact that gifted students can absorb more materials is very true. They can learn more advanced materials, and some of them are interested in learning those things. But, we have to remind ourselves about the first reason why we go to school. Why are we willing to spend about 21 years -- from kindergarten to Ph.D. -- to study in formal institutions? For what purpose?

In his article What Do We Teach When We Teach?, Electrical Professor M.C. Loui (1997) states that teaching is teaching public values, together with the ability to think critically, creatively and actively.

These are the most important things we learn at school. After learning the values and the ability to think, we apply them in learning to live together in society.

Of course, we learn, for example, Einstein's theory of relativity, but basic values like honesty and fairness and the ability to think are the gist and primary things we learn.

In an extreme case, a person can improve his or her ability to live in society if he or she has the public values, even if Einstein's theory is not known.

Therefore, in my opinion, gifted students should learn more about values and the ability to think. Teachers should give special attention to provide them with opportunities to learn the universal values and to learn to think critically.

If gifted students master the materials listed in the regular curriculum sufficiently, they will not face any significant obstacles in university. The curriculum we have now is quite rich already.

So it is very possible that the knowledge of gifted students and their ordinary counterparts are equal, but at least gifted students can think more critically and creatively.

Moreover, they can apply the universal values above and adapt better in society. Is that not better? After all, are not those values and that ability to think the things we believe can improve the quality of our society?

Besides, if we know so many things, it does not mean that we are smart.

In practice, to improve those things are more difficult to do than to increase the amount of subject materials. To make a lesson plan enabling gifted students to learn those things is not as easy as to add some advanced level contents. But, it is very possible.

The teachers must plan a number of discussion sessions with open-ended questions, where every student can comment and argue about them. Even in the second or third year of elementary school, the teachers must provide opportunities that each student can debate all subjects, from math to history.

The second debatable issue in this regard is the question whether we have to group the gifted students together and separate them from ordinary students. Both have advantages and disadvantages. Both have some classroom facts to support the strategy.

One advantage in separating them is that gifted students can complete their learning process much faster and more effectively.

Moreover, they can have a very strong competition climate that makes them more motivated to learn.

On the other hand, one disadvantage in separating them is that there will be some feelings of inferiority among the regular students and feelings of superiority among the gifted ones. Also, the social values the students learn cannot be optimal with this separation.

If we do not separate them, the social values among all students can be improved. All students will improve their learning process. The ordinary students will learn from their gifted friends, and the gifted ones will also improve their learning process.

Moreover, all students will learn to accept that they are different. Some have certain abilities more than the others. Is that not also a fact we have learned in life?

One notable disadvantage by not separating them is that some gifted students will find their classrooms frustrating. But, it may also be an advantage point because the gifted students will learn how to be patient with others.

Certainly, both strategies require intelligent and creative teachers.

And if we can provide the gifted students with a quality education process, it means that we open up an opportunity for three million Indonesians to be able to improve the quality of our society's future.

Finally, by providing a quality education process to gifted students, it does not mean we can neglect the other students. They need attention. They also need quality teachers and support to provide an effective learning process for them.

The writer is a math teacher living in Bandung.