OK, I admit, I may be a little extreme at times, but this one just irritated me to a point that may not be rational!

I received an e-mail via a weblist I'm on and the topic was the term "gifted". There was at least 8-10 parents of gifted kids talking about how much easier things would be if their children were referred to as something other than "gifted".

They feel that the term is elitist and carries an "I've got it made" atitude, which doesn't reflect the truth behind our kids. They would like our children to be referred to as "Asynchronous learners".

How long before that term becomes "Elitist?" Used to be they called kids like this genius. That term was changed to gifted in honor of political correctness. With so many more pressing issues facing these kids I can't even believe that people want to focus on something so......Stupid!

Fact is if you call a zebra a horse with stripes, it's still a zebra....JMO

The debate on labeling kids is one that will never go away and then on top of that the debate of the label itself. I hear it all the time and usually from teachers with GT kids as they push the boredom card. Debating it is not my problem it is that it falls so low on the totem pole compared to what really needs to be advocated for the Genius/Gifted/Asynchronous/WHATEVER learner. Let's pull our resources for more important things. Just think how much we could do for our children if we got past the petty stuff and united on the structure of GT education needs.

Parents do throw daggers w/their eyes if you use the word "gifted" . I usually say my DS is an anomaly LOL

Exactly!

My son used to describe himself as an "un-normal-y".

That is funny.

Oh, girlfriend, I am SOOOOOOO with you! This is one of my big complaints. I don't care if you call my kid sdgtlkhasdi, just TEACH him! How is that elitist? Words aren't elitist, people are!

It annoys the fool out of me!

Touche Kris!!

No, that's not accurate. All kids have gifts, but not all kids are gifted.

"Gifted" is short for "academically gifted" or "intellectually gifted," and it is the professionally accepted term for this different way of learning and developing. It is a specific term with a precise meaning in the fields of education and psychology.

I agree that it is unfortunate that so many people confuse the professional term and the generic one. But that's like demanding that we change the name "heart" because too many people use it to mean the heart shape we see at Valentine's Day rather than the muscle that pumps blood.

I would be fine with using some other term. But I don't see any point in the GT community wasting a lot of energy on this. Words are useless without action. Teach my kids!

I agree with Kriston. I don't care what you want to call it, just teach them what they need and are capable of learning...

There are so many issues within this community that are so much more important. How do people find the time to worry about such pettiness?

I don't agree with the argument " All children are gifted". Yes, everyone has their own strengths which can be developed but this has nothing to do with being gifted. I like how this writer (teacher) puts everything into perspective.
http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/unwrapping_the_gifted/2008/11/this_years_kid_not_next_years.html

"It's the gifted kid who ends up feeling badly about himself because he�s treading water with no goal in sight, because he's constantly encountering roadblocks in his learning, because no one recognizes what he can really do, and because he's not learning to his capacity"

I love this article S-T. I was told my DS6 wants to jump ahead (yeah why is this negative!). We were told he had to follow the group and he can do multipication and division at home. Yeah at home after 5:00!! I just gave up. Next year I need to learn HOW to advocate for my child.

LOL Masterofnone at your reason: more whining.

I do understand what you are saying. I however would never say "I am gifted to have enough to eat" or "I am gifted to have such wonderful kids." I wonder if it's a regional thing to use gifted in that way? I'm southern and never heard it used in that way. I was in fact not familiar with the term gifted in any way until I had kids. I would say "I am fortunate/lucky/blessed to have..."

I will vote for BRILLIANT!!!

I'm midwestern and I've never heard it used that way either. <shrug>

<joking alert>
Rather than changing the official term, perhaps you all should stop using a precise term so inappropriately. (Said with a big, friendly smile, in the spirit of your very nice post, MON)

But seriously, I do get what you're saying, MON. I just think Shari is right that if we change this term, the next one will be equally disputed. Saying kids are smarter-than-the-average-bear--in whatever words you choose!--is frowned upon in our anti-intellectual society. No term is going to be okay. Any term used to ID GT kids will be seen as elitist. I guarantee it.

Aren't all kids talented, too? Can't some kids excel without being gifted? And really, that's imprecise, since some gifted kids aren't so much talented or excelling as they are kids with untapped potential...

It's why I just shrug and move on. It's a red herring issue. We can't win. Call GT kids whatever you want. Changing the name won't change a thing, so we might as well stick with what we've got and press on with trying to get something done for them.

IMHO...

I have an issue with the term gifted for two reasons:

1. How do I describe my "non-gifted" child when discussing both children, especially in front of either or both of them? And how does it make HER feel if I say she's the non-gifted, normal, or less smart one?

2. Also, what happens when my gifted child fails at something? **Oh, he's human. But he's a gifted human! He should be brilliant at everything. Things should come easy. Failure is not an option.** Now granted, we know that gifted children ARE indeed human, and they will fail. They will be better at certain things and horrible at others. But the term gifted tells the general population that this child or person is smart and great at EVERYTHING, which isn't the case. When a child is labeled as gifted, with the general populations' opinion on what the term gifted means, when he/she fails or doesn't do well, the child's reaction to his/her own self will be greater than a "normal" child who fails (depression, low self-esteem, etc). To me the term gifted suggests that the child is not normal. And while the gifted child's abilities are more advanced than the average child, the child is not abnormal in the sense that there is something wrong with him/her. I'm not sure how to get my point across on that one (I'm overly wordy, I know).

With that said, however, I do have many more important things to focus on than the word gifted, like making sure my child understands his abilities, is in a learning environment that supports them, and also understands that while it's really great that his brain is capable of so much, and he should continue to feed it, he is no more important in our household than his "ungifted" sister.

My 2 yr old is young for me to have thought about how he will feel if I call his DS "gifted". Very interesting comment. Ok my DS2 is young but so far I am not seeing any red flags for "gifted". So I will have to be careful what words I use when describing DS6.

Thankfully having one of each, a boy and a girl, makes it MUCH easier to use words like smartest, favorite, etc... DD may not be "gifted", but she is my smartest daughter. She is my favorite little girl in the whole world, etc...

LOL well I am in trouble then w/2 boys!

I've often wondered about why people get their feathers ruffled at the term. I wonder if it is because being smart, in our culture, is a global positive attribute like beauty or kindness. Everyone wants their children to have all of these qualities. IMHO, no one wants to think about their kid not being smart, beautiful and kind. That's my slant anyway...

Here are my 2 cents: When I was growing up, I was a teacher-pleaser, straight-A student who got id'd for the gifted pullout. My brother, who I think is every bit as smart as I am, but in a different way, was kind of a space-cadet student and got C's. I think he probably would have been id'd as 2E in this day and age. So, the key is that if you fall under a specific school's definition, you get to be called gifted, or whatever the preferred label is. [This also led to my mom to advocate to get the pull-outs available to all the students, because in the 70's they were just enrichment anyway, which every kid could have benefitted from. She did not succeed.]

I like the idea that my kid has "special education needs," which i think came from grinity.

I think any time we try to "legislate" (figuratively speaking) any one term as being the right one or the wrong one, we're losing a lot of the give and take of every little interaction that it might come up in. The problem is when we're talking to people (other parents, teachers, etc.), about people (our kids), we're navigating some possibly treacherous social waters no matter what we say. There are so many different things that are perfect for one situation and just entirely wrong for another, depending on the relationships, the histories and the points you're communicating... you can't rely on one word for everything.

I've been in situations where the whole long story really was exactly right, and others where it had to be softened a little, and others where it really had to be avoided at all costs. Very rarely I've needed the short, blunt, honest-almost-to-the-point-of-rudeness response. It doesn't change because I'm hiding anything, but because I knew what I would be communicating to that person in that situation right then if I did otherwise. No single description is going to work for every single interaction.

I like that too "special education needs". Why "special ed" only refers to the low end of the spectrum that is not fair.
My DS6 home w/strep for 2 days is about to complete a 250 page phonics book, a new one he just recently got.
I askd him.. why does he feel to need to finish the book so fast? he said.. because it is too easy and he is only learning a tiny bit.

This term makes the most sense to me anyway, but in Public Schools it is as if gifted and special ed are polar opposites. There are a lot of parents that still struggle with their schools in reference to their 2E child. If the child is classified as gifted they can not be also included in the Special Ed department. Makes me scratch my head. So logically it makes sense but realistically the schools would never allow that label to be used for both ends of the spectrum.

I'll never forget a conversation I had with a neighbor. I had just found out about some 2E types of issues that dd had, and the neighbor had a child with special needs. So I launched into this conversation about how I had her tested and they came up with these ideas for issues to pursue. Part of it included telling of how disappointed I was in the K teacher, who clued into none of this. I said something like, "she's bright but" is having trouble learning to read, etc. and the neighbor's eyes widened, "you mean like 'gifted'?!"

Interestingly, I got the same reaction when I told her first grade teacher - we were switching to montessori and it was part of the story about dd and why the switch. Her eyes nearly popped out of her head when I said the G word. The funny thing is, the teacher is very bright and from what I have seen, her child is probably gifted as well.

I think the problem in both cases happened to be the misconception that gifted = some kind of superstar genius. It's really hard for some people to understand MG, especially in the context of a 2E person.

I agree that special ed should include gifted. I think on my district's website, they might be located in the same place, under "learning services".

About the OP, I think that there will be issues no matter what people call it, but "gifted" really is an unfortunate choice of words. It emphasizes a sense of elitism (probably the wrong word also, but I think you get my drift) that might already be present in such a distinction.

I guess nobody wishes their kid to be on the low end therefore parents are not banging down the doors to get their kids into the "special ed" classes. If these classes included the gifted then people would be banging on the doors trying to get in.

Ideally, we wouldn't have to label our kids. They would all have their individual needs (academic, social, creative, athletic, etc.) met at school. Remember that ND kids have individual needs, too. Their strengths should be nurtured and their weaknesses addressed. I think this is what rubs a lot of parents the wrong way. We seem to be saying that the individual needs of GT kids are somehow more important than those of ND kids. They are not. All kids are important. Unfortunately, our current educational system does not take anyone's individual needs into account. Even for kids on IEP, it is like pulling teeth to get an individually designed program. Parents are put in the position of having to demand services for their kids all the time. It's a real shame and a waste of resources.

I also think people here the word gifted and think genius as in Einstein. You read articles "Is your child gifted? Probably not. Einsteins' only happen 1 in a XYZ." I find those articles aren't talking about MG or even HG, maybe more like PG/EG.

People like Einstein and Mozart would be "prodigies" to me. Although I have no problem with the word "gifted", I find myself not using it often. :P I just asked for "accommodation for his needs". The school refers to it as "the other spectrum of special needs" since right not, there is no gifted program/ resources planned for it.
I have online friends with GT kids who use the term "bright" even though everyone on board knows exactly what they meant.
I can't stand it when the majority assumes that a GT kid will have no problem in life. And when they do, these people will quickly jump into conclusion that it's sad that the GT kids have intelligence but no EQ .

Part of the stigma with the "gifted" label is the elitism that pull out programs sometimes create (I first read this in Genius Denied). In order to placate the rich white parents, district pullout programs might have kids go see a play or a field trip or other activities that don't specifically address a particular child's area of "giftedness". At one school in my town, parents have their kids privately tested again and again to qualify because the gifted program is almost a social stratum.

The charter school where 2 of my kids attend does not believe in labeling and all kids get to go to the theater, field trips, poetry workshops, etc. Everyone benefits from these enrichment opportunities. It doesn't mean that my son shouldn't go to a different math class (which he does). In a small school setting, I like including everyone in the special activities and not using the label with subject acceleration/deceleration that relates to "need".

Einstein was not the most gifted of his generation. He contributed in a narrow area at a time where there were basic questions being asked. One could take most mathematically gifted HS kids today, put the basic questions in front of them, give them the Lorenz transformation, and many can derive much of his work.

What I am driving at is that very rarely will history offer a generation a chance to come up with basic insights. Most of the time the things that can be done are more mundane, but just as important, and these require highly gifted minds to execute. Its just as hard to run Exxon or GE as it is to derive basic insights. There are challenges and interesting problems everywhere.

We need to provide kids with a range of examples to look up to, not just someone (Einstein) whose impact is mostly unobtainable due to where we are in our understanding of things. Its kind of like those parents who think little johnny will play pro ball. Except in this case, the pro ball team is only formed once every hundred years.

This is what I use when tackling issues with the school system. How can you create all these great programs, classes, etc for kids with LD, BD, MR, etc, yet there is direction when it comes to the other side? Granted, my state has programs, but there is no rhyme or reason to how kids are tested for them, etc... no standards.

And just like you will have behavioral issues when a child on one side of that spectrum is placed in an environment that doesn't suit his/her needs, you can't expect it NOT to happen on the other side of the spectrum.

I read that w/the mightiest computers that E=MCsquared was just PROVEN!! It took over 100 years to even prove it, it was assumed to be true but just recently they actually proved it.
That is crazy!!
Teachers thought Einstein would never amount to anything. Soo funny.

[/quote]

And just like you will have behavioral issues when a child on one side of that spectrum is placed in an environment that doesn't suit his/her needs, you can't expect it NOT to happen on the other side of the spectrum. [/quote]


I am afraid my DS6 will be labeled ADHD if he has to sit there learning letters etc. He will bounce off the walls. Meanwhile give him something challenging and he will sit for hours.

Exactly!!!! DS5 is the exact same way!

MON, I agree with you. I really, really dislike the word "gifted."

I think just the word gifted comes with connotation of being preferred by a higher power, to being chosen somehow. I know that's not what it means in this context, but I think that even having that emotional/"higher power" attachment often outweighs the actual facts for people who don't know much about gifted kids.

I feel embarrassed using the word "gifted," even talking to dh -- it just doesn't feel right, due to what common conception of "giftedness" is. It does carry a stigma to it. I prefer to say "ahead of the curve!"

I'm not all up in arms about not using it, since "gifted" is the understood term. Just in conversation, I avoid the "g" word if at all possible and replace it with "pretty bright" or "advanced." That's not gifted denial; that's my dislike of the word and the connotations it carries.

Hi Mia,
I also feel embarrassed using the term "gifted".
I think any replacement term will evoke the same feelings on both ends. It is sad we can't feel free to talk about our kids.
You know when there was a question my son might be on the low end of the curve since he was a late talker, oh then poeple love to hear about it, love to talk about it. But when the tides changed he he surpassed everyones expectations and ended up at the other end of the spectrum well then no one wants to hear about it.

Interesting. I tell people all the time my brother is way smarter than I am, yet I was the ones in the GT classes. I'm not sure my brother would've been labeled as a 2E, nor do I think (from what I remember/been told) that he was gifted by definition or based on a learning concepts timeline, but it wasn't until high school that he was in more advanced classes for the subjects that he excelled in (history/social studies).

I get weird looks when I have I say I have a kid with special education needs. When I explain the situation, I get "well at least your kid is smart". True, but if his needs are not met, he will have other problems later on down the road, like his mother. It also doesn't mean that the problems that we do have with him now are any less as frustrating or difficult to deal with, etc...