First lesson in talent development from sports: Start young with everyone

This first discussion combines several of the ten strategies listed in the previous blog posting:
(1) A strategy of training as many students as possible in basic skills of the sport.
(2) Start young with opportunities to learn the sport and participate.
(3) Access to sports is open to everyone who may wish to participate.
(5) No one is excluded in early stages through aptitude or skills tests, but everyone has the opportunity to learn basic skills.
(7) In early stages no one is excluded if they do not display the predispositional characteristics, so that they have the opportunity to possibly develop those characteristics.

These 5 strategies have one common philosophical basis: make opportunity available to as broad a population as possible and give everyone who shows interest basic training. Then see what pops up.

Dr. Ralph Richards of the Western Australia Institute for Sports delivered a paper at a convention in 1999 in which he outlined the identification and talent development of swimming athletes (www.wasa.asn.au/html/coaching/rtf/tid-ascta.rtf). “The best form of Talent Identification and Development,” says Richards, “is mass participation. The best way to identify talent is to have large numbers of young children exposed to quality learn-to-swim programs and then to keep them in the sport during the age-group years.”

This happens in most all sports. Opportunities to participate is open to all who wish to participate, and everyone gets quality instruction in the rules and philosophy of the game, as well as opportunity to practice and play. My brother Ben lives in South Africa and used to coach boys' rugby at his son's school. I watched him once working with a team of 6-7 year olds in a game. He was on the field with his boys, directing them, giving them guidance and advice as they played their little hearts out. Once he had to physically turn a little boy around who was well on his way to the opposing team's end zone. I watched him pat the little guy on the backside and say - Go the other way, tiger! The other team's coach was doing the same things. At that stage it wasn't so much about winning, as about learning and enjoying!

Many of those little boys continued playing rugby for their elementary school, and some played for their secondary school. One or two even went on to play for their university or town rugby club. They all love rugby, though, and are informed (and very vocal) fans and spectators.

What is striking is that none of those little guys are told - you can't play because you are not good enough. How ludicrous would that be? How do we know which ones are going to develop into fine players and which ones will drop out of the team after one season?

Contrast this with talent development in schools. We don't give any particular attention to the bright kids until second grade (and then only in those states that identify gifted kids at that age). Then we test them for intellectual ability, and we set an arbitrary cutoff score and the ones who make it are crowned as "gifted" and the ones who don't make the cut, very often never again have the opportunity to try out for the "gifted team."

No wonder we miss a lot of talented students who could have gained immensely from enriched curriculum and instruction! No wonder the dropout rate amongst high ability high schoolers is increasing steadily - kids are bored with school and take their GED and go on to college.

So Rule #1 in Catharine de Wet's School of Dreams: Every single child in my School of Dreams gets enriched curriculum and instruction. Any child who shows interest in a topic can pursue that topic. We won't ever use test scores to admit a child or exclude a child from any subject or course we teach. Their performance, and continued interest, will determine whether they go on to more advanced courses in that subject or domain.

Impossible to do, you say? Only if we continue to organize schools based on age and lockstep curriculum. Who says all 6 year olds have to enter school and learn to count and learn their letters and their colors? Who says a 6 year old who already knows those things should not be in a different class with kids who have commensurate abilities? Who says we cannot schedule classes in different subject at the same time for all grades so that a third grader can attend a reading class with fifth graders who read at the same level? Or a fourth grader who struggles with mathematical concepts can attend a math class with third graders? Who says?

You may answer, "Everybody!"

WHY?