GGA.
I keep coming back to this thread...
and then realizing that, well, no; I
still haven't had enough coffee-- er, time-- um, whatever-- to formulate anything coherent in response.
I think Megmeg probably articulated my horror here the most succinctly.
Is this kind of push parenting COMMONPLACE?? I shudder to think that maybe it is much more common than I'd thought. Now I'm sifting through a decade worth of offhand commentary from parent-strangers eager to demonstrate to me/us that their children are "bright, too" even when it's almost comically awkward to bring it up.
I'm a little dumbfounded; it would never have occurred to me that this kind of enmeshed parenting was behind that drive. I assumed that it was trophy parenting, which I suppose is just as bad in its own way.
I've always wondered why on earth parents would behave in such a way... WHY would you want your child to be "Gifted" (capital-G-gifted, I mean). Having lived this, honestly, I think I'd much rather have a kid who was 'bright, but not gifted' than PG. Besides, unless this is overtly delusional thinking, and what happens if you
succeed in prepping your child into a gifted magnet (or whatever passes for the rarified differentiated instructional format locally)?? Won't it be pretty damaging for an otherwise bright, even above-average, youngster to try desperately to keep up with a pace and level of instruction that they simply aren't intended to cope with?? ??? I truly do NOT understand this in the context of loving parenting.
I think that this comes close to the heart of what bothered me most about the author's subtext. The author seems to be suggesting that her PERCEPTION of her intellect is all that matters. That she was "plenty smart enough" until she knew that she wasn't that unusual. Fair enough, and I don't disagree with the notion that you basically are what you can do, generally speaking...
BUT. What bugged me about this was the notion that the label is utterly without meaning, and that therefore gaming the system to GET it was just dandy. Because it implies that there ARE no truly 'gifted' kids-- only parents who are more (or less) motivated to
purchase the label for their children.
That I clearly disagree with. I have to think such things are at least somewhat rare. Or maybe I just hope so. It's possible that a large percentage of "MG" kids in the 125 range are merely groomed to look that way instead, by parents who for some bizarre reason think that this will garner their kids more opportunities and better instructional quality (which is kind of laughable, if you ask me).
I hate to break it to her, but yes, Virginia, there
is PG, and it looks very little like "groomed for the test." Some people really ARE that much 'smarter' than others. Not in some made-up way, but in an authentic, day-to-day way. Sorry that probably doesn't make her feel any better.
Wow.
