I know this is a question I often hear around the place. "If a child is gifted and other children aren't, why is their academic performance better than the gifted child?"
I was wondering if anybody had any ideas on this and if their are any articles out their relating to this. We have quite a few gifted children at our school and especially in the years my children are in, pretty much there are a heap of other students in those years that are performing alot better than our children. I am referring to lower primary, not sure if this makes a difference.

Boredom. Lack of challenge. Lack of peer support. Lack of teacher support! Interests above and beyond the curriculum. Take your pick and mix...more will be along later i'm sure

And....

Because when your brain is only partially engaged in a task, it's easier to make errors--vs. when you are working in "zone of proximal development" where the work is just difficult enough to require complete attention.

Because when you "know" the answer but have to show your work, you can become very confused (try swinging a baseball bat in little tiny steps instead of one fluid swing--you'll probably miss the ball).

Because when you're used to "knowing" and you are presented with something unknown, you are likely to say "I don't know" rather than to make the guess and risk being wrong.

Because you might not finish your work if you can't keep your mind on it, and it's hard to keep your mind on something that doesn't take you anywhere "new".

Because maybe the other kids are good linear, step by step learners and you think your way must be "wrong" because no one else does it that way--and because when you try to do it their way it doesn't make sense (it's routine based, not concept based) and so you make a lot of mistakes or say you can't do it.

Because you don't know that you are supposed to elaborate on your answer and no one asks you to--they just take it at face value. But students who have been working in zpd have gotten feedback as they've made errors along the way, and they have learned to elaborate/explain what they mean.

(sigh)

Thankyou for the imput. So is it safe to assume that if the environment is ideal a GT child should perform better than a non-GT child or is it a case of potential vrs intelligence ie Does high IQ mean actual intellect or the ability to understand information presented. We are often told at our school that just because a child is gifted does not mean they will perform well or be sitting at the top of the class. Based on the results that are appearing at our school this appears to be the case, we are having a difficult time accepting this. Are we incorrect? The only way the GT children are able to keep up with the pack so to speak is by lots of parental guidance at home, not only with year curriculum but with above year curriculum also. Please help we are very confused and are questioning our beliefs on what giftedness actually is

I think it is safe to assume that all other things being equal, a gifted child will be able to perform higher level work than a normally developing child in the gifted child's area of giftedness. That does NOT mean that a gifted child will perform better at the same work as a normally developing child. Often if the work is too easy, a gifted child will not feel motivated to complete it diligently. And a child may be gifted in some areas but not others, or have interests in some areas but not others.

Of course, many gifted children have other issues as well. I think the bottom line for teachers probably shouldn't be whether a child is technically "gifted," but rather what sort of curriculum and teaching will suit that child the best. After all, all kids are different.

My son got a poor grade in Science. A large part of the assessment was adaptation - seals in the Arctic, camels in the desert etc;. The little'un was interested in Darwin and genetic mutation. Of course grade 3 doesn't cover this - he won't cover this until maybe year 3 seniors - by which time he will probably be switched off because nobody is interested at this level in his ideas or questions.

This question is why I did not realize my DD was gifted. She looked like a high achiever to me. I was very surprised when I found out her IQ, because I knew that some of her "higher achieving" classmates did not get into the gifted program.
~ I have now learned that it is my child�s intense curiosity and ability to rapidly process information which makes her gifted & that true academic ability is not reflected in grade level tests. She can work and understand concepts way above her grade level but that does not mean she knows the proper school protocol for the answer.

Love this comment!

That is SO well said. I actually wonder if gifted children are LESS likely to understand the protocols, because they get less constructive feedback (from early on everything they do seems to be praised "as is") and are used to having less than their best effort accepted as quality work.

Wow, what a great thread and awesome answers!

These had definitely been our experience in the lower elementary grades in particular.

For all the reasons listed above and elsewhere on this thread, even the self-disciplined and motivated gifted kid can�t distinguish them self from the rest because the expectations are set low enough that the majority can meet or exceed them.

LOVELY!

Fantastic responses. If the general concensus is output seems more dependent on discipline, consistency of effort, and other intrinsic factors, if the GT children of our school are not seeming to be able to execute these traits and are therefore not fairing as well as the non-GT children, should we and how do we address this?

As the children get older and the curriculum becomes a little more enriched will these traits listed above suddenly appear or is there a need for the parents to intervene?

Personally I think it IS important to address this, but it sure is tough to find a receptive audience. It seems to me that output issues for an individual child can be based on personality/personal organization traits but just as important (and probably more important) are early opportunities to work and recieve feedback in the zpd.

Maybe a good analogy is the "culture shock" some people experience when they move to another country. Those who make those transitions successfully/happily are those who can take novelty and uncertainty in stride. Too many g/t kids do not experience either novelty or uncertainty in their early years of school, while most other students do. Which students will be best equipped to approach open ended assignments, or to embrace and enjoy the struggle of revisiting and improving a first attempt? Which will see it as part of the learning process rather than as a negative commentary on their overall intelligence?

On another thread someone described a testing situation in which their child had a tester who didn't accept "that's too hard" or "I don't know that". It sounded like they recognized the responses as learned behaviors. I am GREEN with envy. Those answers are frequently accepted by adults who work with or test my children. There is a dent worn in my wall from banging my ahead against it so often.... (sigh).

There are only fairy tail answers on how to fix this�or lots of money
The current focus of our school system is to bring every student up to the standards bar, NCLB. It is a sad fact that many gifted students can underachieve and still reach the bar, so their real potential gets overlooked. They may not be fairing as well as the non GT but, they reach the bar and that is all the school is required do.
The average kids make up the majority and the under average kids need more attention, that leaves very little time and funding for the higher than average kids.

`All we can realistically hope for is to find a good school who will take the time to acknowledge our children and even better if we can find a good teacher who can see potential, even if it is hiding.

It is exactly because performance is what counts, not potential, that many parents of GT kids (or nonGT kids, too, for that matter) try to optimize their kids' learning environment so that kids have the opportunity to realize their full potential--transforming it into high performance. School tests as I see it, especially at lower grades, depend less on intellectual abilities but more on being patient and thorough. I do think a huge number of kids, not just GT kids, are under-challenged in our schools. And kids who are used to not being stimulated--their minds always working way below capacity--do develop bad working habits.

I think it's incredibly important to make sure that kids have good work habits, but good work habits will be useful only when people do MEANINGFUL WORK. So I don't agree with the attitude prevalent among many schools and teachers that kids should receive challenging work ONLY WHEN they can do perfectly on the unchallenging work. I think kids should receive challenging work, and then be required to do well. And in an ideal world (in my ideal world at least), GT or not should not even be an issue, every kid should be challenged according to their individual abilities and every kid should be required to do well.

If it is hard for regular gifted kids, just think what school is like for twice exceptional kids.

I wish our school was more like yours.
From what I have heard about our school from gifted students and a former gifted student with dysgraphia, and even a few teachers, our school seems to have more in common with the schools these twice exceptional kids went to--see the part about negative school experiences: http://ldonline.org/article/Counseling_Needs_of_Academically_Talented_
Students_with_Learning_Disabilities

The focus at our small town school seems to be more on sports than academics and one of their sports is picking on kids like my son.

My bright, very coordinated, former cheerleader daughter, who I am sure would have scored higher on the performance section of an IQ test than her little brother, did not learn as much as she should have in school. She admits that she did not pay much attention in school, just enough to pass tests, never studied, and then quickly forgot every thing she learned for the test. She could color in the lines at an early age, could draw very well, is very good at puzzles, is creative, but she was distracted in school because she was so social.

My daughter's uncoordinated little brother seems much more academically gifted than she was. She was a high achiever until she became a cheerleader. Where she learned just enough to pass the tests, my son continues to build on what he knows because he has that drive to learn more. On his own he finds additional information on the internet to go along with whatever we are studying. For example, for history we are studying the 1970's and he found online copies of Popular
Science magazines dating back to the 1800's. He is even interested in the advertisements and took time to look up the history of the tobacco warning labels. Because he has all this interesting history knowledge and popular culture knowledge he is a good conversationalist, unless he has had too much caffeine or Red Dye #40 which causes him to talk too much. Whatever topic comes up, he has knows something about it, enough to make a joke with history, popular culture or current events references.

Because of his disability, he will never be an artist. He will have to create pictures and express his ideas with words. Since we homeschool he has the freedom to look up extra information and it is this freedom to learn that makes up for the hard things he is dealing with in life.

At our school, my son would not be allowed to learn at the higher level he is capable of at home.

School is stupid and a wast of time so she or he would rather daydream about something. Its very easy for kids to lose respect for teachers whom they can reason rings around.