I think it depends. All four of mine carry the "gifted" label, so it was sort of hard to say "well, this one is this way, as opposed to that one...". Dh was a gifted student, and I would have been had they invented gifted programs back in the pre-flood days. So it really didn't cross my mind that the kids wouldn't be.
Overall, they've always seemed pretty bright, albeit with asynchronous milestones (especially Miss 2E). Well, except when they've been doing really intensely ridiculous things like fingerpainting the living room walls with craft paint, which showed a complete disregard for outcome-based planning. And when I say "fingerpainting", we're not talking Gauguin or Van Gogh or even Grandma Moses. More like the bastard child of Haring and Pollock, which I figure is pretty age-typical for three.
OTOH, I don't see a whole lot of point in pursuing a gifted diagnosis at two. I mean...what does it change? What's the benefit? It's the same kid, either way, and you meet their needs, not the needs of a label. The only use I've really found for it is in regards to public schooling. Or bragging rights, I suppose, though IME after the first couple of kids the shiny wears off of that and you're desperate to avoid talking to casual subway acquaintances about what an odd little duck your kid is.
Last edited by eldertree; 08/31/12 05:12 AM.
