Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums General Discussion Labelling children = good, except gifted label

An interesting article from the perspective of a longtime teacher who is eager to publicly share her cluelessness about gifted kids:

http://shine.yahoo.com/parenting/ever-okay-label-kids-201300635.html

Ick. I thought there might be some hope when she stated the following about her son, who has executive dysfunction issues:

"To be fair, I see what people mean about labels for my son. I don't talk about him using labels with new people we meet because I expect that they should get to know him. If they ask me about how different he is, though, it really helps to discuss how differently his brain works."

But no. She obviously has no clue about what gifted is, including the fact that GT kids' brains work differently.

Maybe she actually does know, but doesn't know she knows because she uses the label "truly gifted"?

20 years times 20 students = 400 total students. She said she knew less than a dozen "truly gifted" students. 3% of 400 = 12.

Perhaps her district uses only achievement tests for GT placement?

Naah... I think clueless is a good label here.

I wouldn't mind this math, except that she is a school administrator, not a classroom teacher, so I assumed she had been in contact with many more kids. I think there might still be some hope with her, though, if she meets a parent of a 2E kid who helps her in dealing with her son's EF issues.

There is 22 grade schools in my daughters district. There is approximately 800 5th graders like my daughter. Including my daughter 15 go to the magnet school. Thats about 2%. Her number seems right to me.

What prompted me to label her response as "cluelessness" was the anecdote about the little girl, Alexis. Viewed from the prism of my own parenting experience (of one of those "truly gifted" girls), it reads to me like a textbook case of an underachiever who has gone underground with her abilities at an early age. And here's a trusted teacher, who had an opportunity to inspire her, who helped her hide instead. My own DD was headed down this same road before we brought her up short.

To too many teachers, "gifted" means "likes jumping through hoops." If your child is labeled gifted, and they don't choose to do more of those math problems that are 2 years below their level, well, that's not what gifted looks like.

I liked this response to her in the comments:

"I see. So, labeling YOUR kid is OK because it "helps to discuss how differently his brain works" but labeling some other kid with a different label (gifted) for exactly the same reason is not OK? Why does this sound like the bitterness of a parent whose kid is not gifted but who still wants her kid to be "special" and to be excused for any failings? Your anecdote about Alexis is more about one mother who is a freak about her kid and less about the value of labels, ostensibly the point of your article. All parents of gifted kids are no more like Alexis's mother than all parents of little tennis players are like Richard Williams (feakazoid father of Serena and Venus).

Your article makes me think, as I have before, that maybe we SHOULD stop using the term gifted anymore, since so many people, especially educators who like to say things like "all kids are gifted," refuse to acknowledge that giftedness exists. So let's just start saying "some kids are smarter than other kids" and go from there. It's true, and this ridiculous attempt by the education establishment to pretend that it isn't so as to ensure everyone's strong self esteem doesn't change that fact. Most kids are, in fact, not THAT stupid, and THEY know perfectly well than some kids are smarter and some are dumber, whether educators acknowledge it or not. And on some level, specifically that of raw intellect, these exceptionally smart kids (aka gifted) ARE "more special than all the other children," just the way some children are more special than all other children in having raw musical talent or raw athletic talent. Schools don't have trouble acknowledging those differences, but for some reason cannot acknowledge differences in intellect, even though we all know they exist. So, Ms. Wickham, with the acceptably labelable son, how about you start saying smart instead of gifted. Will that make you feel better? And, more to the point, how about you acknowledge there are smart kids and start giving them the education they deserve instead of treating them as if they are the same as other kids while asking for special treatment for your son because he has "Executive Dysfuntion" but isn't all that smart?"

Yes, Dude, it wasn't so much the fact that she hadn't seen more than 20 GT kids in her 20 years in schools (she is currently an assistant principal), but her attitude and apparent belief that GT kids are all high achievers and teacher pleasers. Maybe there is a problem in her district with parents claiming that all their kid's misbehavior is caused by their giftedness, but in our world here, the GT kids need help, not someone who appears to not even believe GT kids exist.

It also could mean she got lucky on one test. I"ve read many posts on this site about kids scores dropping when they get older and it's always the teachers fault. Maybe it's just the way things work out. I know this is a simplistic example but when I was in kindergarden I was the tallest kid. I was going to be a basketball player. I ended up 5 ft. 8 in. More my point is some kids just peak earlier than others.

Yup... sigh.