The commendable aim of this recent UK report, commissioned by the Office for Standards in Education (OFSTED), is 'to provide up-to-date research findings about the development and education of very able pupils, and so improve communication between researchers and those who make and carry out practical educational decisions' (p.v). Joan Freeman has organised her analysis into three sections that address 'frequently asked questions', namely: Who are the very able? What are the very able like? How to educate the very able?

Such an undertaking is an ambitious one, especially when trying to cover such a wide domain in 56 pages of text (plus another 11 of references), yet the intent is to convey a core of central ideas succinctly and in a form that busy practitioners will find clear and to the point. I found it easy to read and thought-provoking.

One of the virtues of this overview is that Freeman's familiarity with pertinent European research has enabled her to cite a broadly international selection of findings, though it is unsurprising that the terminology of schooling in England is the common thread around which this analysis is woven. Nevertheless, this is not particularly intrusive in what is essentially a discussion of issues that transcend national boundaries.

One of the things that struck me as I read parts of this report was how a slight change of emphasis in wording could have given a different impression on a particular matter. For example, concerning research in France that compared groups of secondary students who were 'kept back', 'normal' or 'grade-skipped' it is stated that 'Although there was no difference in self-confidence between the groups, the advanced group were the least well behaved' (p.38). The latter finding, which may be construed as an expression (by teachers? by the researchers?) of preference for conformity or docility, seems much less significant than the former one of no ill effect for self-confidence. Later, another researcher, in Oxfordshire, is quoted as concluding that 'grade-skipping could be considered as a school's failure (emphasis in original) to provide adequately for its very able pupils' (p.42), whereas I would argue that acceleration may be seen as one of the several ways that should be considered when teachers decide how best to address the needs of any individual gifted child, my further assumption being that what is optimal may well involve a mix of two or more of these.

This said, one of the many virtues of the book is its inclusion of regular summaries, in coloured 'boxes', of the implication for practice of the research findings summarised. These provide a constructive starting point for teachers, or parents, new to the literature in this domain, especially if Freeman is successful in her implicit aim of encouraging readers of her report to pursue in more depth the issues she highlights.

There is no doubting Freeman's commitment as an advocate for gifted students and she adds another dimension to this when arguing for her 'Sports Approach' to talent development, a combination of 'open learning' for the young and 'identification by provision'. Her vision is that:

In the same way as those who are talented and motivated can select themselves for extra tuition and practice in sports, they could opt for extra foreign languages or physics. (p.19)

Freeman returns to this theme in her final paragraph where it is stated that:

Using the example of school sport - The Sports Approach - less popular subjects, such as chemistry, French, or business studies could be supported with similar generosity. We could then expect to see a great rise in the proportion of pupils we now recognise as very able. (p.56)

This is a book that will challenge and inform.

Stan Bailey, The University of New England, Armidale

August 1999