I agree completely, Kriston . Maybe I'm okay with the label of gifted because I attended "special" gifted classes as a kid, where all of the advanced kids where tracked together in the public school. From 7th grade on, I did not attend a single class in school that was not solely for the gifted kids. So all of the kids that I hung out with and were friends with were gifted. Gifted to me was a normal part of growing up.
However, my son came home from 1st grade asking what a freak was. I know that gifted kids are called names. But I explained it to my son this way: It is really no different than calling a person with glasses four-eyes. It says more about the name caller than it does about the intended target. Once my son understood this, he has completely ignored the labels, and for the most part, it has stopped completely.
So I agree that labels are useful tools in order to get the school to provide appropriate educational services. I am reminded of the movement in the 1970's (I think it was the 70's?) where moms of the intellectually challenged kids banded together to call attention to the needs of their children, thus starting the special education movement. It really was just a statement that any child outside of the bell curve needs a curriculum that is tailored to their needs. Our gifted kids may seem to be worlds away from the kids on the opposite side of the bell curve. And yet their needs are quite similar.
It is just curious to me that no one cried favoritism when "special education" was invented for kids on the lower side of the IQ scale. And yet this is exactly the same word that was used to do away with tracking of gifted kids in the public school system. <heavy sigh>
It is a very complicated world when you have to add egos, both bruised and inflated, as well as the jealousy that follows, into the mix.
