http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...ur-exceptional-child-might-not-be-gifted

Not sure if this article has been posted before. It caused mixed feelings for me, because on one hand I really agree with it, in that there are a lot of advanced young kids out there who are labeled gifted but they are not really gifted. On the other hand, what about the ones who ARE really gifted? Their parents aren't allowed to talk about it?

I was thinking about this over the weekend. I met 2 kids and their moms this weekend. One kid, a just turned 4yo, can add and subtract using his fingers. The other kid, a just turned 5yo reads fluently. Both moms pointed it out proudly and both kids demonstrated their skills. I have known both these kids since they were babies. I am truly happy for how smart they are. However, I am not sure they are gifted as much as prepared. I feel guilty even saying this here on this forum but I know the classes these parents send their kids to that make these kids appear gifted. I never show off my kid (except to my parents and of course here). Some days, I am not even sure she is gifted. But then she does stuff that cannot be taught, that is natural and blow-your-minds-off amazing, that makes me think that she is different. She may not be as prepared, she may not have the training that these other bright kids have. But she has a brain that is constantly thinking and coming up with its own neat ideas on how the world works. So yes, my kid won't tell you what 6x5 is nor read a word in front of others but she will show you her spider web that she has been painstakingly building for the last 2 weeks. I just realize I have been rambling but like I said I have been thinking about this lately.

Honestly, I don't disagree with the author one bit. Except--

he's clearly describing his AVERAGE experience here.

He hasn't encountered very many EG/PG kids, I'll say that.

If he had, he would have a clearer picture in his mind about why "not sorting them out until 3rd or 4th grade" is not fine for those who ARE in point of fact HG+. You've already lost a good portion of those kids by then, as they have rapidly (just as they learn everything else!) come to the conclusion that "school" is a place you go to do what you're told and experience mind-numbing, punitive indoctrination about things that you have known for a long time.

So sure, that seems like a good plan, doesn't it? The article is a fine on for average through MG children, probably. But not for the parents who find themselves on this forum, by and large.

This trait, I think, is at the heart of giftedness. Always thinking. Always a new idea.

I suspect that many parents of truly gifted kids (as opposed to truly prepped bright kids) tend to keep their mouths shut for the most part. I certainly do, and I find that when I bring up my kids' talents in front of the wrong people, things just go downhill.

I mean, the whole point of prepping is achievement, and it's often driven by the parental units. When you look at it this way, it's hardly surprising that they'll tell people that Little Johnny can read at age 5 or add using his fingers. But if a child does this stuff at age 3 or earlier, of her own accord, there's no inbuilt parental motivation to tell other people. I'm not sure I even told my parents about a lot of the stuff my kids did at very early ages. There was no need. My kids are very smart, we all know it, and that's that.

"They all even out by 3rd grade".

That's what I thought, too. So many ways of saying the same thing.

All I got from the article is that he chooses not to recognize anyone as gifted unless they meet the criteria based on IQ testing.

I remember when I first joined this board, I was asking questions about whether or not I should have my DD IQ tested and many people offered opinions that were so insightful and beneficial.

We have no gifted public education here in MI, I do not have the financial resources to send DD to a gifted private school I more or less wanted her IQ tested so I knew exactly WHO and WHAT I was dealing with. Essentially, just to ease my own mind from any curiosity of whether or not I was adequately helping my very bright DD or hurting her by not doing enough.

Based on the feedback and personal anecdotes I received I decided not to test at this time. But there are so many signs pointing towards genuine giftedness and not just preparedness or being brighter then average.

So I guess I am just going to have to be categorized as one of "those" parents. It would have bothered me a year or two ago, but I have realized that my DD and I have nothing to prove, this is her journey, I just want her to make the most of it and feel like she has every opportunity possible.

I appreciate having this board to read and gather information, to help me because I am more then likely not gifted and appreciate the guidance and advice that I receive to navigate my DD forward on her journey.

While I can understand why this article may be a somewhat useful caution to the general public, it comes dangerously close to slipping into a tone of disregard for the traits of the truly gifted young child. I think, unfortunately, it is this type of thinking that is often used as a justification for not enriching younger truly gifted students. I have come to believe that we need to "feed" the gifted students earlier, not later (3rd grade is too late, IMO). Also, it seems to scoff a bit much at what might be true abilities in young gifted children, IMO.

The "evening out by third grade" has simply NOT been my experience - at all.

Here's another interesting blog post. "Gifted should not be a dirty word."
http://www.crushingtallpoppies.com/2013/06/just-after-i-posted-my-thoughts-on-g.html

Ok, so I actually hate the word "gifted", personally. Just because it sounds so elitist, and I wish there was another word or phrase to better describe the condition. I try not to use it but sometimes you have to, such as when you're talking to school officials about "gifted programming". But I usually end up regretting using the word.

I totally agree with this. We don't discuss DD4's progress with anyone - It tends to be a conversation killer.

This author doesn't take into account that some kids are driven to learn and understand how the world works of their own accord. Independent of whether their parents push them or not. DD's reading and math abilities, though impressive to me and DH, are not what makes us think that she is "different". It's the way she thinks.

Here's one example of the conversations we have on a regular basis. While giving her baby sister a bath last night DD said, "Mom, why was I born first and DD11 months born second?" I tried to just solve this the easy way and say, "We just had you first." That answer was not acceptable to her. She continued, "Ya but why am I me and why is she her. Who decides who is who and why?" Now we live in what I would call an "enriched" environment - a lot of books and geeky hobbies, but nothing during our days of playing lego and watching Gillian's Island involves this type of philosophical exploration.

I fail to see how, if some children think like this at 3 or 4 years old how they can even out with other children by grade 3? That would mean that they would have to stagnate for the next 4 years. That logic is mind boggling.

I prefer the term "high cognitive needs" or "asynchronous" myself-- but yeah, sometimes you have to use terms that are clearly loaded in the vernacular, like "advanced," "high cognitive capacity," or yes, "academically gifted."

I also tend to talk about the RATE of learning being different and resulting in different needs as a student.

Because that seems to be the clearest consequence and the largest problem. It's not that she needs "advanced" material all the time-- just that she needs for the rate of instruction to be about 2.5 to 10 times what most of her classmates do. And truthfully, that includes some of the "identified" bright/GT ones.

No way can you hothouse that kind of rate. Luckily, that seems to be the "tell" for the real thing with most educators. I've yet to run into anyone that honestly believes that a 9year old can be "coached" into learning an entire year's worth of high school math, science, or social studies in a couple of weeks. They may think that I'm lying, but they don't think that it doesn't mean what I think it means.

I remember going on vacation while I was pregnant with my daughter. DS13 (then 4) had so many questions about what was going on, I just bought a basic book about pregnancy (lots of pictures) and took it with us on the plane. We spent considerable time looking at pictures of babies growing inside of mommies.


Agreed. It drives me to distraction. I think that an important thing that drives it is that schools generally do NOT grok gifted kids, and they especially do not grok kids who are highly gifted or more/HG+. I suspect that there is an idea of what "gifted" looks like (high achievers who don't complain, in part). Kids who don't fit it are therefore not gifted.

Outside of anonymous message boards, a few close friends and close family we don't tend to discuss our kids in detail. It didn't take long to learn that our normal wasn't exactly normal

Most people who spend any amount of time with them (DS in particular) eventually come to their own conclusions. They might think he is hothoused to know all he does about the odd topics he obsesses over. Once you are lucky enough to be interrogated by him (or witness him interrogating us) then they usually understand that he is the one driving this bus. I use the word interrogated because honestly, it seems too relaxed to say that he asks questions. It is intense.

Sometimes it cracks me up watching him interact with kids his age in front of other parents. I love watching the reactions he sometimes can get out of people and they usually look at me and I just smile and shrug my shoulders. He's only 7 so there aren't any filters at this point so it can be quite entertaining.

eyreapparent - I had basically the same conversation with DS a few years ago. Buckle up, in my experience the questions keep getting crazier

And I'll add that there is also the fact that if the instruction is even halfway decent, the child will often hold up a hand when you've only explained part of something and say, "Stop! I think I get it!" At which the child will then prove that s/he gets it.

I didn't have any major problems with the article. It seemed to me to say, "This woman appears to be rushing to judgement on her child's abilities based on limited information," and I didn't see any reason why he would be wrong. In this woman's case, her child may even out by third grade, because she may be wrong about her child's abilities, and time will tell. The author also does not discount the idea that she may be dead right about her child's abilities, and she's just not articulating her case very well.

But then, a literal reading of his message is one thing, and the way others may choose to interpret it is something else. He does address but does not do a good job of poking holes in many of the bad stereotypes we find ourselves dealing with (false binary of nature/nurture, precocious = hothoused, all are gifted in some way, etc.), so the article does more harm than good.

Didn't read the article, but IQ is measured on a continuum. Giftedness is not a thing that you either have or don't have. There's nothing magical that happens at IQ=130. If you use that criterion, and the IQ test typically has an error of just a few points, then the false positives and false negatives will each outnumber the true positives.

Howler - that's exactly what we've seen. And DS's behavior follows a very clear pattern... when a new subject is introduced, he's easily agitated and anxious for like, 2-3 days. Then he goes back to being calm, then about a week later he's bored and spends a lot of time reading, refusing to do work, hanging out in the resource room. Then they start a new subject and it repeats. This year I'm just thankful that he is actually learning new things! Even if the progress is too slow.

I get that some kids are hothoused, I get it. Yet, what about those of us who have dc that are different. They learn rapidly, with great intensity and thirst for more? I am sick of educator's or really anyone else who thinks I hothoused my son. This is a VERY sore topic for me. As ds was my first, I just enjoyed him and fun; never was trying to teach him. I honestly, wasn't even sure what to teach.

With ds3, he refuses to respond with any traditional, boring methods. Yet, he will spell words with alphabet fries, loves playing Cars math games, and playing with gear toys.

I am grateful to have met a wonderful neuropsych who sees ds6 for who he is.

Last gripe, I'm sick of school wanting kids to fit in a box! Linguistically, I get it. Yet, I had no idea how badly served my ds would be at school.

I was very happy my child did NOT get the 1st grade teacher that used the "I think all children are gifted" as her favorite quote.

Ds6 is getting the GT co-ordinator for his class teacher next year. Her intro letter mentioned she has an affinity with ESL students but had nothing on her position as GT co-ordinator??

Sorry to be a devil's advocate but after watching my two friends' kids as well as other advanced kids in dd's class, I wonder how a teacher who must only encounter a hg+ child once in a long time (if at all), would be able to distinguish a bright well prepared kid from a gifted kid. Especially during primary years and especially when the gifted kid has no interest in showing off their skills. I suspect the writer of the original article on this post has similar experience. He must come across at least a couple of well prepared kids with pushy parents every year, every class so when the parent with the real deal comes along, it is but natural to believe that he has just one more of the same.

Agreed. In some respects, that makes it all the more unfathomable that HG+ children could ever go unremarked. Yet somehow cognitive dissonance is up to the task of ignoring the reality right in front of many educators and administrators.

Face it how many teachers can even comprehend the fact that a seven year old kid will be pleading to do algebra or enjoying and for the most part understanding the graphic novel Logicomix.

I actually agree with the author as far as what was actually stated. He did not have enough information to ascertain whether the child in question was gifted. He even acknowledged that the child might be gifted. He didn't state that you have to wait until 3rd grade to ascertain giftedness, only that two seemingly disparate academic levels at K may (not will) converge by 3rd grade. Two of my children were reading chapter books in K, but I never presumed they were gifted based on a few years above-level reading. However, there were many other non-academic indications of giftedness, which suggested that they were likely gifted. Perhaps because I don't usually approach my children's education through the lens of giftedness, I did not find the author's experience/opinion offensive. I don't think this author was doubting IQ test scores or other (more) reliable indicators of giftedness pior to 3rd grade.

My son is in a school district with a large number of gifted kids, and 'hot house' kids. He was in a pullout class for the gifted & highly motivated kids for 3 years in older elementary. While some of the kids kids are both gifted and highly motivated, the non-gifted but extremely motivated were obviously different from the 'gifted' kids. For example my son didn't get the best grades in class but every teacher told me that it was obvious to them he was gifted and needed the rigor & challenge the class provided. I still get comments (he is a freshman in H.S.) from other parents that the other kids are very impressed with his math & analytical skills.

The trait that my son's teachers notice & comment on that I feel illustrates being gifted is how quickly he picks up new complex ideas.

I would tend to agree with this idea. Even starting at an LOG around 1 in 500 (IQ in the low 140s, I think), many years will likely pass before a teacher with an annual class of 25-30 kids will meet a child at this ability level. Perhaps the meeting would happen sooner with bigger classes (35-40 kids), but at that point, the teacher won't be noticing a whole lot of detail about each student.

Plus, even if the teacher has taught one HG kid, that's only one kid, which isn't much of a sample size. In the absence of education about giftedness, I suspect that many teachers wouldn't start to get it until they've taught several gifties. Which, given the numbers, is unlikely to happen in most schools.

I think that conventional ideas about giftedness lump into two categories: truly gifted = kids who learn calculus when they're 3 (derives from sensationalized media stories about THE NEXT EINSTEIN!!!) and GATE-program-level gifted = high achiever who doesn't make waves. A quirky kid who won't sit still or go along with the program doesn't fit either of these definitions.

These two ideas, combined with "my many years in the classroom" can add up to "Sorry, your kid isn't gifted."

Yes!!

I find it bewildering, that dichotomy. Unfortunately, I seem to have one of those children who isn't happily working on her second Fields Medal-worthy dissertation at 14... but on the other, she is far beyond what most school guidance counselors have ever seen live and in person.

Once they talk to her and look at who and what she is, experienced administrators take a step back, do a double take, and admit that they've "heard that we had one of these a few years ago." Or they "know of a boy/girl like that," or something equivalent.

At least that has been our experience. I figure that means that the local guidance counselor, who has seen about 20,000 kids over his career, and 'heard about' as many as another 30K... has seen one other child like mine, and heard of one other. Most of DD's teachers haven't ever seen another PG child.

(Well, not true-- but effectively she attends a school that serves as something of a magnet for kids at high LOG because conventional B&M schooling here does SO bloody little for them-- so there are a handful of them in her school of 4K+ students. Two in a class of 370 something. Both graduating in the top four. They are NOTHING like one another, other than being academic hotshots.)

This article and the preceding posts sums up the exact thinking from my son's first grade teacher, except I actually backed it up with an IQ test and an achievement test. He's highly gifted in the >99.9% IQ with a 99% achievement test score and yet I get pushback with similar reasoning.

Things I hear from her "once kids learn to read they all even out"; "truly gifted kids don't fit in"; "he doesn't already know x " (and will proceed to tell me how he doesn't answer every question she asks him correctly). She's apparently taught really gifted kids before and they would truly cry when they were bored. My son just complains at home.

I don't doubt that she has taught other gifted kids, but my son doesn't apparently fit the bill. He isn't particularly precocious in academics, but he's happy, we'll-adjusted and very social. He's very creative which helps him entertain himself and his humor gains him friends. He learns new things very quickly and has a superb memory. His handwriting just doesn't match up to the rest of him.

It is just this mindset of teachers of 'gifted or not' that underestimates kids. Honestly, who cares if they are/aren't gifted. If they are advanced in a subject or two for their age, give them the benefit of the doubt until proven otherwise. Helping them continue on a higher trajectory is more helpful than questioning how long that higher trajectory will last. If they have been 'hothoused' by their parents, then that is just helping them achieve outside the normal education setting. There is nothing wrong with that. If a kid has an interest and the parents are involved, it's bound to happen. It's a beautiful thing. High-achiever kids just might help spur some ambition and healthy competitiveness in gifted kids who fail to find a challenge and lose interest. Parents can self-identify their gifted kids until testing gives them an definitive answer. We don't know for sure until then. It's just a shame it doesn't happen until 3rd grade.If the test shows it though, it's a travesty to doubt or ignore it.

(Caveat - my son is newly identified through private testing and he's only 6, so I can imagine this discussion will grow more tiresome over the next couple of years.)

I know our experience is unlike that of most parents here because we have the good fortune to have a gifted magnet available to us, but I just will put in that the teachers at the magnet are fully aware that gifted does not have to mean "highly motivated achiever who does not make waves." That isn't to say we don't have some of those--and I will mention again that all these kids are 130+ IQ (hard cutoff). It's all over the map. I have a quirky high achiever myself (she gets very good grades but also evinces many "Hello, I am gifted and creative and rather a pain" characteristics), but her classmates include kids with LDs who have areas of very high achievement, some kids who are all around very bright, some artistic kids who are unusual and interesting, some highly mathy kids, some kids who were obviously square pegs and "I'm bored" problems in previous placements--it really runs the spectrum. Note that the curriculum does not fully suit all these kids. However, the teachers are no fools and do not ever question whether these kids are gifted. They know they are.

I honestly do not know if any of her classmates are PG. I don't know them well enough to say. I suspect not, but I could be wrong. I would say that certainly, definitely, some are HG.

I have IQ testing on both my kids (with DS that testing was done due to him being 2e and a TBI and we were concerned about the other e). But I have to say that just because we have IQ testing, showing high scores, it doesn't really mean much to people. "IQ" is a dirty word, just like "gifted". I always try to come up with an alternate word for their IQ test results, and fail. Teachers/school admin still seem to be convinced that I hothouse my kids and that's the only reason they do so well. Heck, they probably think I hothoused them to do well on an IQ test, somehow. I didn't even know DS would be taking an IQ test. It was just done, and then I was presented with the results. Oh, yeah, and they have no idea what >99.9th percentile really means in terms of how many people in the population exist with scores like that. It could be just a few people in the entire district and they still pooh pooh it and act like it's meaningless, or like the kids are exactly the same as other gifted kids who may only be at the 95th or 98th percentile.

I wasn't offended at all by the article. I think that the teachers run into many parents with well-prepared children who do try to say that high achievement should equal giftedness. There are kids out there who don't demonstrate exceptional achievement before K who are gifted, and those kids may catch up by third grade because they learn quickly. Others may have been extremely well prepared, and once they are learning the same things as others, may not stay ahead.

I also understand how the differences may not be apparent in K. One of my twins has been reading since age 3, and the other learned to read the summer before K. They are both in first grade , and can read at about a third grade level for fiction, but prefer shorter books with pictures. They read higher level non-fiction books, and prefer those because they can learn from them.

The twin who has been reading longest learned quickly and progressed rapidly, but the speed with which his brother has caught up was shocking to us. The twin who has been reading longest does improve each year (and continues to be ahead of his peers) but his brother makes giants leaps in ability during the school year and has shocked me a couple of times this year when I asked him to read a non-school provided book (as the books provided by the school are at a low level). Just last weekend, for example, we were shocked when he wanted to read a page out of the book that his brother had been reading with me (which was at least middle school level) and he read it fluently. He couldn't have read it in December, but apparently made another huge leap in reading ability over the winter break. He probably appears more "gifted" to his teacher than his brother does to his teacher because of his pace of progression, but they both are HG. (Now he has hit the same "wall" as his brother - we have learned the hard way that the school isn't going to let them move more than one grade level ahead in "official" reading levels.)

This is kind of relevant here so I am posting. I am researching published gifted programs in our school district as well as neighboring districts to figure out DD's schooling options 2 years from now (Yup, I am a planner:)). One school district that is highly rated has this selection criteria for G&T starting in 4th grade: Any student with an IQ of >110 or any student even with <110 IQ if recommended by a teacher. So, I am thinking it is basically 90% of the class as that district is inhabited by engineers, doctors and professors whose kids would most likely be above average IQ. So, what is the point? If this is the norm for most public school G&T programs, I can see how the average teacher is just tired to listening to the term "my gifted kid".

The thing is, these types of articles are written for the audience of MG and lower children/parents. The fact is that there are just too few HG+/PG kids to really dedicate an article to them in a general population magazine. For the gifted coordinators, the article rings true. Their job is really to educate those in the mid-upper ends, but not the extreme ends. No gifted program is, long term, really going to meet a PG child's needs. They will outgrow it, or at least need multiple skips.

But as to my own experience, DS6 has an average to MG friend. (Honestly I have no idea where he is, but parent's think he is bright. Seeing him through the comparative lense of my own son, I have a harder time seeing it...not that it isn't there.) Friend's grandma is a gifted-ed teacher. Friend's mom has made comments before about evening out in third grade, and other views she got from her mom, the grandmother. BUT, she also, of her own will (I wasn't arguing at all) said, "oh, but this obviously doesn't apply to your DS...he is on a different level." So it might be that a lot of people believe these statements, but only when applied to the median. They subconsciously lop off the end members, and just expect that we intuitively know we are NOT talking about the extremes. But for the kids who are really well served by the gifted programs, kids who are MG, there is more sense in these statements. It is probably harder to tell them apart from well prepped kids who have had three years of academic preschool. Those kids darn-well better be at the top of the K class, as they've had three years of the same curriculum over and over. Take a well prepped average kid who has had three years of academic pre-school and place them with an MG kid with no prep, and it very well could be hard for a teacher of 30 to be able to know them well enough to sort it out until third grade.

My point is that I don't think we need to take insult at this. We don't need to assume that every article written about gifted education is about profoundly gifted education. If schools had PG programs, they would be awfully lonely classrooms.

I agree with this.

I also will say this, though: I think there is a lot of gray area, all over the place, and I don't place a vast amount of faith in scores, anyway.

I thought two 40 year teaching veterans had not been convinced of my PG child's difference, they had, they even picked out the likely frequency, but they were just stalling us.

Apparently the pace of learning and the conceptual leaps are a dead giveaway.

Oh dear heavens, I cannot tell you how much I detest that phrase. Regardless of whether a child is gifted, shouldn’t it be a point of shame for a school that a student who enters kindergarten reading at a third grade level is still reading at a 3rd grade level (or even only a 4th grade level) 3 years later? That the child who was learning multiplication at 5 is still learning it at age 9?

Yes, I understand and am not arguing that an early reader or early mathematician is necessarily gifted.

However, even if not clinically gifted, some children are early learners who soak up information and knowledge and want to learn. Whether people consider them well prepared, houthoused, or some other term with which I am unfamiliar is really immaterial. These children have shown a propensity for learning, and in many cases a desire to do so.

Just as you can’t teach a child to be gifted, you really can’t teach a child to learn earlier than they are willing/ready. I know plenty of parents who wish it were otherwise, and their children have been some of the best prepared students in my son’s school. No matter how many flashcards they threw at little Sally, or how many Kumon sessions little Johnny attended, she didn’t start reading until grade 2 and he didn’t understand multiplication until grade 3.

So, even if the early learners are “only” well prepared, why is it a point of pride that schools simply allow them to stagnate for 2-4 years while the other students play catch up? Why shouldn’t those students also be given an appropriate education, based on their abilities and level of learning?

I support free, universal education, and I believe that teaching is one of the hardest jobs there is. I would never be able to deal with the parents, much less the administration. Not to mention the idiotic state and federal legislators who impose ridiculous requirements on educators without ever having spent one day as a teacher trying to corral 25-30 sugar-hyped 8 year olds.

Even so, I find it shameful that educators perpetuate the myth that everything does- and worse, that everything should- even out by 3rd grade. How this nasty little idea ever made its way into schools of pedagogy is beyond me, and I honestly do not understand how educators don’t see the subtext to those comments. How are they blind to the fact that this statement means that a child learned little to nothing on their watch? How do they not see the laziness implied in this statement? How do they not see the poor light in which it casts their own talents, the school at which they teach, and the system in general?

I admit I’ve never had the patience to discuss this with teachers, even those in my own family, but I’d love to know the answers.



And PS, the idea is rampant at private schools in our area as well, so I don’t think this is just a problem for the public school system.

MonetFan - As a member of the choir your speaking to, I say "Preach on!"

Absolutely!!

MonetFan, EXACTLY!!!

When I talk with my children's teachers (which doesn't happen much anymore), or when I talk with friends, parents, etc., I don't really use the word "gifted". I think every child deserves to learn what he/she is ready and is capable of learning, whether it's because the kid has no difficulty learning advanced contents, or because the kid is willing to put in five times the amount of time to learn the advanced contents.

But there is a huge amount of resistance from the teachers that I've met. I remember DS's 2nd grade teacher happily informed me that he was reading at "end-of-2nd-grade" level. Which was ridiculous because he finished reading the first four Harry Potter books (there were only four by then) in 1st grade. The teacher then told me that he didn't do further testing because he was not ready to teach beyond end-of-grade material anyways so further testing was not useful.

Math homework was a constant struggle for DS as long as I could remember, because DS felt insulted having to do work that he knew how to do even before starting elementary schools. He finally felt that he was learning something when we discovered The Art of Problem Solving. I remember there was an assignment in 4th grade (something about fractions) that he simply refused to do, and finally his four-year-old sister happily did it for him. Yet at a school-wide parent-teacher meeting where parents tried very hard to advocate math enrichment, some teachers came up with the defense that "we are teaching complex thinking skills, not just computation. Your kids might be good at computation but it doesn't mean that they are good at math". The parents were just shocked--we are a group of scientists, engineers, college professors, IT folks, etc., but we couldn't make the teachers see that holding kids back with extremely simple math work does not teach them complex thinking.

I can go on and on...

Well said!!

I talked to upper level admin and said that principals keep asking me "What is it that you want?" (like I'm a crazy, super-demanding tiger mother). What is it that I want? I want my children to make at least one year academic gain in every subject in school each year without being enriched/supplemented at home, just like what is expected of children of average abilities. No one knows how to reply to this. In their minds, the kid is already ahead, they have met the "standards" so there is no problem if they don't learn anything in school for years on end.
There is no way my kids are going to eventually level out unless they learn absolutely nothing (either from home or school) in reading and math for the next 2-3 years in school. As long as they pass the school's standardized testing and they receive revenue for my children, that's all that matters. My kids are simply warm bodies that generate revenue, occupy space and produce scores. If they become too demanding in terms of "special needs" (god forbid they would have to hire another speech or occupational therapist to give my child 20 minutes per week), the school will try to figure out how to eliminate them.
The crazy thing is, there are so many parents who would be willing to come in and help the school for free. Parents have offered to go into DD's class and pull the gifted cluster for math. Same thing for DS's class. I would go in and work with kids who are struggling too. I've done it before and have experience. But the school wants to keep parents out, then they complain about how hard their jobs are.

Amen!!!

Awesome post, too, MonetFan!!!

I've encountered this attitude. It's deeply ingrained. I suspect that different things drive it: stress over high-stakes tests, not understanding giftedness, and negative feelings about giftedness.

My eldest is taking a health class right now, and his textbook talks about the fact that people tend to fear people with mental illnesses because they're different. Obviously, giftedness isn't a mental illness, but gifties are different, and there's probably a lot that same reaction at work. Remember what Pastor Ray Mummert said about the teaching of evolution in schools a few years back:


It wouldn't surprise me if a lot of people agree with this sentiment. Intelligent, educated people probably make no sense to many others in this country, and this would be scary in many ways. These people wave their college degrees and say stuff that makes no sense to me, and they want to influence policy.

I also find this a very common attitude. Our school district's stated goal is for every child to achieve to the full extent of his/her abilities. In practice though, if a student is at grade level or above, or gets a passing grade, then there is nothing to worry about.

Yes, our district's stated goal is for each child to find their course on the "personalized learning pathway." LOL! Then if you question them and say that your child is off course in terms of the "personalized learning pathway", they're not interested. All this upper level admin person cared about was the fact that DS is not being pulled out of class for his IEP minutes. Because she knows we can sue them and there are legal ramifications.

Personally I think gifted education should be mandated in every state. If a kid scores above the 98th percentile on an IQ test or achievement testing, they get a gifted/talented IEP. Of course, then school districts will complain about how this is unfunded (yet another unfunded mandate for them to deal with). And they will try to eliminate gifted kids just like they do special needs kids. If funding was guaranteed to them though, and they actually benefited financially from having gifted kids in their schools, imagine how well they would do.

That has not been our experience. Our schools appear to be seeking to attract and retain gifted kids, presumably because they lift the standardized test scores and make the school look good.

What is not there is truly differentiated teaching for those kids: the program starts late, after many are already bored, and doesn't address differences within the gifted population. There's a lot to fix.

Blackcat, I'm sorry things sound so negative where you are.

And I do agree that appropriate funding-- both for kids with disabilities and for the gifted-- would help.

Exactly! Unfortunately the focus is on level, not progress. Teachers and schools are evaluated based on the percentage of kids that are "on level" rather than the percentage of kids that have "made adequate progress". It's a fundamental flaw in funding, practice, and thinking.

Yes! Case in point: We are in a province that has a two year full day kindergarten program beginning at age 4. DD's class was given a list of words that they should know how to read and spell by the time they finish the two year program. She came home with the list of words and said mommy I know all of these words already. She actually does know all of them but she'll happily repeat and go over these words if the teacher asks because she's a pleaser.

After the holidays I asked her teacher when we would be receiving her next report card. She told me that we would get the next report card shortly and that they would be meeting only with the parents of children they have concerns about. Then she added that there was really no reason to meet about DD because she is fine. I suppose she thought that that would make me feel good about my child's progress this year.

I totally understand that there are students that need extra support/help in various areas or are not meeting the academic targets for the year and that it is important to meet with their parents. I have absolutely no problem with that. However, why isn't it important to discuss that my child already knows the current class work? Why is it ok for her to repeat things she already knows ad nauseam? At least meet with me and tell me that you know she knows it. At the VERY least give her one extra word to learn a week. Give me a list and I'll give her the one extra word to learn a week. Throw us a bone!!

If I were more complacent, I suppose I'd be satisfied with DD's teacher saying that there's nothing to meet about because it means that there is nothing to worry about by their standards. I'm sure that many gifted students blossom in third grade and that many have large leaps in understanding. In our situation, though, it looks like the "everything will even out in third grade" adage is something that the district is actually working towards rather than something that happens organically. If DD were to rely solely on her school for all of her input and they place a limit on the amount they allow her to receive, then of course she would even out.

I will state for the record that I do like DD's teachers. They have helped her with a lot of non academic skills and are kind and nurturing. We're okay for now with me afterschooling but I worry about the future.

I would be a bit concerned about that too. 110 is basically average IQ.

The article didn't offend me as far as his point of view. I was offended on behalf of the person he was talking about. It was a cheap shot and taking advantage.

When I have asked that question, I have told administrators. I want my son to keep his love of learning and enjoy school. If you bore my child to tears, all he will learn is that he hates school and that it is a waste of his time.

This to me suggests that she really is gifted... because you're on the journey for the right reasons: responding to her needs.