The Senate approved at first reading the bill which introduces, for the first time in Italy, a regulatory framework dedicated to students with high cognitive potential. A measure awaited for years, which fills a legislative gap and which should align our country with the 1994 Council of Europe Recommendation on the education of gifted children.
The proposal – entitled “Provisions in favor of pupils and students with high cognitive potential and delegation to the Government for their recognition” – aims to build a school capable of valorising different talents, offering equal opportunities for growth and learning. But are we sure that all the necessary tools are there?
Personalized teaching and teacher training
The bill delegates the Government to issue legislative decrees to guarantee personalized training courses and the full right to study for gifted students. The aim would be to allow each child to express their full potential, overcoming a school system that has too often neglected those who learn more quickly or in a different way.
The bill recognizes the personalization of teaching as a fundamental tool for a more modern and inclusive school, centered on the person and not on standardized models.
A technical-scientific committee and a three-year training plan
Among the measures envisaged is also the creation of a technical-scientific committee, with experts from the Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Health, responsible for defining the criteria for identifying students with high cognitive potential.
There is also a three-year training plan for teachers, a crucial element for providing school staff with the tools necessary to recognise, accompany and enhance these students.
Teacher training: the weak link of the bill
The bill on students with high cognitive potential certainly represents a step forward on a cultural level, but its success will depend entirely on how much and how the school that will have to put it into practice is trained.
The bill speaks of an “experimental three-year training plan”, but does not clearly define either the methods or the economic resources necessary to make it operational. And this is a critical point. Without adequate funds and without widespread and continuous training courses, the real risk is that “training” remains confined to a few pilot courses, perhaps optional, leaving the majority of teachers without real tools to recognize and accompany gifted students.
Another weakness is that the bill does not specify what type of skills teachers will have to acquire. Giftedness does not manifest itself uniformly: it can coexist with learning disabilities, emotional or behavioral difficulties, and requires very refined pedagogical and psychological preparation. If training remains too theoretical or standardized, it will not serve to build the sensitivity necessary to distinguish between “high academic performance” and “true cognitive potential”.
Furthermore, the lack of univocal criteria for identifying students risks making training ineffective: each school or teacher could interpret giftedness differently, generating territorial inhomogeneity and disparities.
In practice, teachers are asked to recognize and value these students, but without providing clear parameters or shared evaluation tools.
Finally, the delegation to the Government for the implementing decrees is another critical point: the training of teachers will depend on future political choices, and not on an already outlined strategy. This could lengthen the time and reduce the coherence of the project, distancing it from the real needs of the school staff.
In short, the bill marks a positive change of mentality – recognizing that talents must also be “included” – but without structural, compulsory and well-funded training, teachers will be left alone when faced with a category of students that is complex to manage.
