HIGH marks to Ms Jessie Tan's questioning of the current Gifted Education Programme last Saturday ('Cleverly or acutely coached?'). Aside from the elitism and underlying conflicts of interest created by the business of high-cost tutorial test coaching, do not many of the gifts our children possess go unrecognised, or worse, undeveloped?

The Ministry of Education (MOE) should take to task the former teachers of such gifted programmes, who are cashing in on parents' obsession. Obviously MOE's 'guidelines' of no coaching required are misguided. The potential conflict of interest warrants an investigation by MOE. Why not provide 'gifted programme lessons' as part of the school curriculum, since every child is entitled to be 'trained' as gifted?

Would not a test based more objectively on aptitude or IQ be a better gauge of a child's intellectual ability? Why not use the globally recognised Mensa tests?

Once identified as 'gifted', would not an expanded curriculum (rather than a 'hothouse' obsession on the same familiar subjects) better broaden the student's interest, and further develop his gifted potential? The gifted classes could remain derivatives of the core English, mathematics and science disciplines recognised as vital. I cannot help but think, however, that these students would be better served learning more about the performing arts, journalism, computer science, music and oceanography at an early age, rather than be driven to score higher than their peers in standardised tests.

Ngeow Yuen-Lian (Ms)

This article was first published in The Straits Times on 28 Nov, 2008.