My older daughter isn't profoundly gifted (at least, I don't think so).

She could sound out words at a young age, acquires languages and math concepts quickly, and now loves to read. But she's motivated by social factors like fitting in and connecting with people emotionally. She wouldn't work on worksheets all day long if given the chance--she'd play outdoors. She has missed maybe two math problems the entire year at school, and though she gets maybe two or three words spelled wrong per page of writing (she's in 1st grade). Her average book of choice is about 3rd or 4th grade level.

Still, our district is very highly competitive. As far as I can see, her skills are common and she plays them down. I don't know that any children in her class are having trouble with math at all.

So, I am kind of nervous to see the results. I have no idea how she'll test, but I do know that most people's test scores don't change a whole lot, percentile-wise, over time. I'm not worried about a very low score--which I believe would just be an indication of her being an unusual thinker, or having not paid attention--because I know she is capable of great performance.

I don't even know what I'm worried about. Her dad and I both tested well and I guess I hope she will, too. I don't know why I feel I'd be disappointed if she did not do well. As if somehow, her test scores on ONE test reflected on me as a parent, or on her as a person. She's very creative and smart.

It's almost like it's too much information. I know she has a level but I don't want to know what it is!!! Unless it's really super awesome. LOL

Just remember that she is the same person tomorrow that she was today, before you had the score.

One of my mantras: Information is a good thing.

It sounds like you have a bit of a preconceived notion of what a gifted child "looks" and acts like - but really, gifted kids are as different as night and day in what they like to do, when they learn to read, whether or not they like worksheets! Just like their not-so-gifted same age kids

Try not to worry - it's one test, one day. She'll still be the same amazing kid she is now even after you know what her scores are. Plus, to be honest, are you sure that one score from the school district is really all that meaningful? There are plenty of us here who's kids have been tested more than once on multiple types of tests and had results that don't always match each other (the tests) or our kids.

Hang in there!

Best wishes,

polarbear

You've received wonderful responses.

I would add one thing which may be helpful whatever the score may be... that mantra would be "mindset".

Carol Dweck's Mindset encourages praising effort, talking up the fun of the mental challenge worthy of one's potential. Links to youtube videos:
Ashley Merryman & Po Bronson: The Myth of Praise (link- )
Teaching a Gifted Mindset (link- )

Typing this on a phone. We definitely praise effort in this house rather than some ephemeral label-related quality. And my daughter does not even know what the test was for, of course. I have no intention of sharing the scores with her. It is too much for a small child to process.

I'm not sure one test is that meaningful... I think that's why I'm asking for a mantra. Logically, I realize that it would be useful if we really needed services but that it's not meaningful in a sense of valuing her ability.


I do have an idea of a services-needing gifted child, but that is not my image of a smart child, a bright child, or a high performing child. It is rather the type of child who is so driven to engage that refusing her the opportunity could be painful. It is for this child that gifted programs exist. The high-critical, high-creativity, does not function in the classroom environment kid. I mean most kids are bored with rote learning. Everyone hates worksheets designed for remedial learners. With gifted kids it is something different.

Otherwise, why spend public money on it?

Anyway... Reading this message board gives me the feeling that I could probably test until I found her awesomeness, if I needed that number.

What I want is not to need a number. Maybe I have found my own mantra. thanks for letting me vent!

To tell or not to tell is a long-standing question/issue/debate for which there is no definitive right/wrong answer as it depends upon the child. Some kiddos are very aware that they are different from the others in their class, and may deeply feel that there is something wrong with them... for some kids it is a relief to have an explanation of how/why they are different and that they may blend in a bit better with older kids.

That fact it is just one test is often explained by calling it a snapshot, just one view of a child.

Scores can be helpful to have prior to a deep need manifesting itself... Some say it may be difficult to test a child once it has become obvious there is a mismatch of curriculum to the child.

While this may seem logical and ideal to some, others may say it buys into myths and stereotypes of what gifted kids look like. Regardless, many parents find learning capped at grade level or one grade level above, even in "gifted" programs and services... painful indeed for gifted kiddos.

If a kiddo is sufficiently different, testing may help understand their intellectual profile. Some parents may be seeking this understanding of their child, others may be seeking the area(s) of strength in a asynchronous child (presuming this may be what you mean by the child's awesomeness?), others may be seeking a number which helps the child qualify for advanced academics or a particular camp or program, a few may be seeking bragging rights.

Whatever it takes to help each kid understand him/herself, develop sustained motivation, and translate their personal level of intellect into achievement and accomplishment.

Indigo, thank you for the mindset link. This is exactly why we agreed to have ds12 skip 6th grade; we were afraid he was developing a fixed mindset exacerbated by perfectionism.

It's an interesting window into one aspect of your child. Thinking of you today, Binip.

KADmom, I am pm'ing you.

Thanks everyone for the thoughtful responses. A lot to think about.

I wouldn't put too much stock in my statements about gifted kids. The point is, the program has a cutoff and it's meant to serve a specific population. That's what I'm talking about. Gifted for the purposes of this program.

I don't think that "gifted" has a lot of meaning beyond that. It's far too vague. You could say in that sense every child is gifted at something, even if not critical thinking. That's not what I mean.

Hope everything went well. I sort of hated the whole evaluation process. No child is just a number and I think as a parent it is difficult to have someone quantify your child. Sending good wishes your way!

I thought they would go out, since they were waiting until that date, but either they have not sent them out yet, or ours was stolen from the mailbox (we've had a lot of thefts around here lately, including a rash of credit card thefts).

I did decide that I am going to let my sister-in-law see the scores and just tell me what I need to do, rather than look myself. I just get a yes or a no, and she won't tell me whether it looks off, or close, unless there is a birthday mistake or something.

That way I won't have a single numeric snapshot in my head when dealing with my kid. I can continue to look at her in a qualitative way and not be biased about her abilities.

I fully understand why some families in need of services do go after the test scores; we are just in a different situation, with existing enrichment at home that we're happy with, a great public school system, and a child who is very social and happy to put on whatever airs are required to fit in. If she can be accelerated, awesome. Less work for me. If not--that's okay. She's still my bright little girl.

As she grows you may wish to be aware of "airs" vs "authenticity". The SENG website (Supporting Emotional Needs of the Gifted) has many articles about developing one's authentic learning, character, and relationships.

A lot of people dislike the term gifted but it does have a defined meaning. All children have gifts, all children are NOT gifted.

Personally, seeing the scores was an eyeopening experience. DS is 2e so we had shockers on both ends of the spectrum and it has helped us understand him and help him in so many ways. I personally don't think of it as a fixed number or a fixed destiny so overall even with a single numeric snapshot it is still only that, a single snapshot. Day to day we deal with what is in front of us at the time.

It has also made us think about our own experiences in a slightly different light than I would have otherwise. DH and I were talking about this on the weekend and I said I knew we were smart but I never thought we were 1/1000 smart or 1/10000 smart or whatever. DH just looked at me and laughed. Even with all that has happened I still don't think of it that way since I work with some people that I view as truly smart and I'm just "average" It keeps me more than humble.

I would also add that in school growing up I figured out pretty young that school was a necessary evil and did what I needed to get through and get to my end career. My parents had no idea that I spent most of the day reading novels under my desk or teaching other kids during math or physics class (I liked doing it and felt bad that the teachers were doing such a horrendous job of teaching stuff they didn't fully understand and were unable to explain in 10 different ways until they found one that clicked with a kid). I never thought to complain because in my eyes there were no other options. I just made the best of the situation which luckily for me and those around me was rather constructive. I have friends that had different coping mechanisms which is why I'm a lot more paranoid when it comes to my kids getting through the system.

Re: the term gifted: I appreciate that people are not using the term willy-nilly, but I think it is clear that there is disagreement about what it means, depending on whom you ask, and I don't mean, which neighbor you ask. There's academic debate about whether there is a qualitatively different sort of person who can be called "gifted" and what that would entail.


I'm aware of it but she's just like that. I can't change the fact that one of her deep-seated needs is to fit in. She's a social chameleon.


See... I have my own scores from childhood. I have my supposedly 99.9th% for math and verbal (though at different times in my life). My mother was acutely aware that I was supposed to be very smart and that I was a pain in the ass. I was in a gifted program--one that is as accelerated as the one my kids would go into, were they accepted.

I have found that the number one thing that matters in life is not intelligence or education, but money and connections. Parents who can help pay for college. Knowing someone who will give you an internship after you graduate. That type of thing. That will get you enough money for a lifestyle that does not require any chemical enhancement. Not being accelerated a year or two in math. So while I want my kids challenged, I doubt that academic challenges will help them avoid substance abuse in the long run. Not in this society, anyway.

Some may say that the way in which one goes about meeting their needs may enhance or detract from personal mental health; for example putting on airs vs authenticity.

Is this a one-year acceleration?

There are many modern-day exceptions, including Oprah Winfrey and Chris Gardner (portrayed by Will Smith in the movie "Pursuit of Happyness"). Pulling one's self up by the bootstraps is essentially the American Dream.

Many of us lacked that and still chose the high road.

No life requires chemical enhancement. That is a choice and the person must own it.

Academic challenges, like other challenges in life, place us with a group of individuals amongst whom people can make connections... eventually helping to find or create other opportunities, including possibly an internship or meaningful volunteer position.

Some may say what matters most is one's own strength of character including attributes such as growth mindset, positivity, and internal locus of control.

I can understand to some extent not wanting to "know" the number. We sought testing for ds7 when things were going really badly once entering kindergarten. Having the neuropsych explain the results what that meant for ds and how to best support him was a wealth of knowledge I am quite grateful for.

In regards to chemicals, I have to somewhat agree with Indigo. Will acceleration solve all problems? No. Will learning to deal with challenge and frustration help in the future? I think yes. I also believe providing the best learning environment you can, while helping your child feel comfortable in his/ her own skin is going to be the building blocks. This will obviously look different for different kids. (For my ds7, local public school just doesn't get him. He is struggling with trying to fit in, being bored, and feeling like he doesn't have a real friend. He needs a different situation to thrive and succeed.)

Indigo--It's one year enhanced from the standard curriculum in the district, but about two years advanced from the national curriculum. Apparently, anyway. When I read about what some kids are learning in K and 1st grade on here, I am guessing that is the case. Algebra for all but remedial by the seventh grade.

I shouldn't have said "require" drugs and alcohol.

I just think that some people don't fit in anywhere into society, and those people are better off numbing their pain than constantly trying to find a place.


For every single one who makes it, there are thousands who don't.

There is no point putting our kids out there for a one in a thousand chance, or one in ten thousand chance.

Some may say this is being judgmental toward others.

Kids who are gifted may already be "out there" as outliers... 1 in 1000 or even more rare in their intelligence profiles.

We advocate to raise awareness of their academic, intellectual, and social/emotional needs.

What do you mean by this? That there's no point helping a child develop an internal locus of control, teaching a child to love his/her authentic self, or securing an appropriately stimulating environment? Because basically every researcher on giftedness suggests the complete opposite. A person deserves psychological stability and support irrespective of intelligence. I don't think you'll find many parents on a forum dedicated to serving the needs of the gifted agreeing that substance abuse is an inevitable (and, by your estimation, preferable) result of extreme giftedness, nor that parents should resign themselves ex ante that their children's needs won't be met.

I say this with all respect and sensitivity intended, but maybe it would be helpful for you to find a professional experienced with gifted issues to speak to about your experiences. Living with a child's giftedness can reopen old wounds if you had a bad experience as a child. Your view of giftedness as expressed here is unusually negative, and your children will pick up on this in forming their own views about themselves and their place in the world.

I think you will be pleasantly surprised at the resources and possibility available to gifted children when the team of adults around them is mobilized around their cause. The hundreds of actively posting parents on here are a testament to the reality that giftedness, though it can be challenging, is a tremendous blessing.

I usually don't get caught up in conversations such as this and try to just stay with the convos I can actually offer up something useful in But, fwiw, I am wondering if you really believe this? It hasn't been my experience at all, and I wouldn't want my children thinking so either. JMO, but from what I've seen of life (and I'm old, so I've seen a bit lol!)... what counts in life is your attitude, your self-confidence, your faith that there is something out there worth getting up for every morning. The sum of life isn't about money or networking-type-connections any more than it is about having a high IQ or being beautiful on the outside. Life is what you make it. It's about motivation and caring. It's about passion. And yes, it's about connections - but it's about connections of caring among fellow human beings, the type of connections that make us human, reaching out to understand each other, offering help to those who need it, offering a smile to others simply because we're happy. Connections to family, friends, giving your all to something you are passionate about.

OK, off my soapbox now.

One last question though - I don't entirely understand not wanting to look at the score. It sounds different than not overthinking or placing too much importance on a number - maybe I misunderstood? I do hope your dd gets into the program

Best wishes,

polarbear

It has absolutely been my experience. I won't put my CV on here but essentially, since the recession started, I haven't been able to get work at even 75% of what I was earning before, no matter how hard I try and how many side-projects I do. I tried to get investors for a business but I just didn't know enough people--leads were dry within a day. I work in the public sector so 75% of a salary is about half what people with my skills make in the private sector. Only the skills are parallel skills: all the software is different so I can't transfer laterally.

As for my kid, she got 99th percentile (they don't use decimals) on both math and verbal on the subject tests. However, her CogAT tests were low--very low. Just as I thought: she is very, very smart, but she is not the type of thinker they are looking for in the program.

Four more years of supplementation and extra homework until middle-school when she can choose her classes and they take performance over IQ scores. Sigh. It could be worse. At least I know the education system. I can get her to that level, no problem.

Then she will be in with all the gifted kids anyway. The trick will be getting her to stick with it and not think she's stupid until then. My stepson, in the same school, says that the gifted kids call the general education kids stupid on the playground, and he himself has said 'I'm not one of the smart kids' to us... he is 99th% math performance, 95th% verbal. 'If I were smart I'd be with the smart kids.' There is no advocating for this. He's not gifted, he's just really smart and quick.

I might move her to immersion for that reason alone.

I understand many are suffering financially. Don't know if it helps, but statistics show you are not alone.

This is bullying and needs to be addressed. There have been recent threads on this (here and here), which may be of help.

Re: recession: not really, but thank you. It's not that I feel bad about myself. I just don't feel I can honestly say to my kid, "Work hard, work smart, take risks, and you'll get ahead." It's simply not true. Life is, in part, a gamble.

Re: bullying:
They are addressing it, but the problem is, once the idea is out there, it doesn't matter if the school points out that the kid in particular is behaving inappropriately. "Stop saying she's ugly" is not the going to convince a girl who has just lost a beauty contest in which half her peers got a prize, that she's beautiful, you know?

It is not that my stepson can't stand up for himself. It's that in a school where half the kids are working a grade level or two ahead, and he does not have that opportunity (because he's not profoundly gifted even if he's highly capable), he is becoming aware that he's not been selected for services by the school system.

There is no changing that. Ultimately, to the school system, the gifted kids are worth the effort, and he is not. He's not gifted but he can figure out what that means.

I hope to see if there is something I can do to make sure that general education kids in my own daughter's class have more enrichment and working-ahead opportunities so that they know they have the opportunity to work a grade level ahead IF they finish their work on time. I will have to ask my partner if he can go in earlier so I can work at the school some to make it happen.

Ultimately, nothing makes you feel good about being left behind half your peers in the school. This is of course compounded for my stepson by the fact that like most of the gifted children, he hasn't been learning anything for the past four years and has NO IDEA how to learn a new math concept. He believes math homework should be completed in under 30 seconds. They are doing pre-algebra now, and he's finally having to read his math book, but refuses. So for the first time in his life, he's getting problems wrong.

I do not want that scenario for my bio kid, and it won't happen, because I am more aware than his mom and dad. Believe me I am trying to work with his dad on 'how to teach a child concepts when he's been taught he is in the bottom half of his class and simultaneously has not learned any new math concepts for four years (more like six), as well as believing that nobody with any intelligence should ever have to read the book, and not doing it perfectly the first time is not good enough'. Because not only gifted kids are perfectionists... sometimes normal kids are too. But on top of that I want to make sure my own daughter gets different messages: that she, too, is highly capable, though she doesn't need the special learning environment of the conceptual learners.

I'm thinking of explaining it in terms of conceptual/intuitive learners vs. absorption/sensory learners, and seeing if I can help the school in providing enrichment for general education in those terms. I fully understand about intuitive learners' needing different curricula. I was in such a program myself. I just wish there were a way to differentiate without my kid hearing that she's in the bottom half... which she is, actually, in her own school.

Yes, as you mention getting ahead financially is transient... people experience floods, fires, earthquakes, and many other setbacks. Working hard often makes us feel good about ourselves in and of itself... the work is its own intrinsic reward... individuals may be satisfied to have mastered something new... and proud of high ethics and character, friendships and healthy relationships. The things polarbear mentioned are what really matter.

Advanced academics provided by a school ought not to bestow a sense of worth, favoritism or superiority (or being left behind, neglect or inferiority).

It is true that the needs of many (most?) gifted children are not well-met and unfortunately he has that in common with them.

Might the introduction of new resources, possibly free accessible web resources such as Khan Academy or others, help him spark his interest in learning and struggling through material... possibly acquiring study skills and developing the growth mindset would help him to avoid underachievement if he is underachieving, and even qualify for some level of advanced academics.

You may wish to look at several books such as the perfectionism books listed in recent threads, see if your son may like to read and discuss... often kids will do this if parents also share similar struggles.

The book Mindset by Carol Dweck may be of interest?

Flexible cluster grouping by readiness and ability for each subject, regardless of chronological age may be a way to address this. When kids are not compared to others of their age and are on par with their clustermates they may all feel special in that the grouping is tailored to them. To use an analogy to flowers, some may bloom in the Spring, others in Summer, Autumn, or Winter. Some grow best in sun, others shade. Some need a lot of moisture, others dry conditions. One is not better than another, they can each be appreciated for their own individual beauty. By trial and error we learn how each flourishes.

Does anyone else share my feeling that we are just being told this by people who have most of the money, to keep us quiet?

I just have this sense that I was tricked into a career in public service, into being generous and taking time off to be with my babies as infants, all for "intangible" rewards. I feel that all these warm and fuzzy feeling things are kind of a confidence trick. "You should feel good about helping, not demand money for it." Well where does that leave me? And everyone who says that managed to get money and is comfortable.

When you don't have money, you have no control over your life.

I've got the whole, do nice things, be a good person, do fulfilling stuff, make a nice family thing down. No problem. What I need is cold, hard cash.


I think this is the real difference between gifted kids and high-performance potential children. He won't do that. He won't take our lead on this and he's not interested in being advanced. He has taken his label and said he's happy with it.

My own kids are different. They are used to being challenged academically. They do not expect to learn at school, and they know that it's about proving yourself.


The district is far too standardized to move to that in the short term, BUT I completely agree.

I might check out that book. I appreciate the recommendation. I do think that we have a similar outlook... my depressed outlook about the future in this country (another reason my kids are bilingual) doesn't translate to my opinion of my own child's capacities.

On a positive note, my daughter received a packet of math challenge work she can do over the weekend, and turn in for extra credit! It's 2nd-3rd grade level fraction work. Woot. She's excited about spending some time on it together tomorrow.

Possibly not, as it has been several days and no one has responded.

Some may see your statement (people who have most of the money encourage others to keep them quiet) as rudeness to polarbear, myself, and others who've volunteered time to encourage you and attempt to address your numerous concerns. Your statement may not get you a lot of love *.

*recent post, "Telling people xxx ... is really not going to get you a lot of love..."

At what point do you take responsibility for researching possible outcomes and being accountable for your decisions?

Chris Gardner was mentioned up-thread. He maintained an internal locus of control and can be an inspiration to us all.

You sound unhappy.

Many parents discuss and weigh whether to accept a child's trajectory or to decide to intervene (possibly utilizing psych/therapy/counseling services) to convince DCs to make full use of their skills, talents, and potential.

Our eyes may see some of the same things, possibly we have a similar SES vantage point, however what we've internalized and chosen to focus on may be quite different, giving us a dissimilar worldview.

Sigh, it has been one year since I posted here but I thought I'd get back to this thread before posting another.

"I am wondering if you really believe this?"

Short answer is, heck yeah.

"You sound unhappy."

Kurt Vonnegut was once asked about an author who'd made millions off a single book, and how that made him feel. And he replied, "I have what he'll never have--I have enough."

We don't have enough to give our kids what they need to get into college (we are narrowly paying down debt). I don't want to be rich, but I would like enough to give my kids opportunities.

I don't know anybody in the public sector who feels they have enough to give their kids the same opportunities that even they had themselves. I know valedictorians who are working second jobs.

Tell me that's not supposed to hurt.

What does it mean to take responsibility for 21-year-old me's choice to work in the public sector? Like, "Wow, I feel really guilty and stupid for believing my mother, my teachers, and the hippy-dippy advice of every adult I knew. I should have known better."

I did absolutely everything I could do to balance success and self-support given the information I had.

What I can do for my children is give them better information.

I missed this thread when you originally posted, btw. As I read your comment above, it reminded me of the comments recently made by the CEO of Microsoft. Satya Nadella-Good Karma

Even though he later apologized for his remark, I think the sticky residue of what was said is not going to go away.

Being there early for your children is priceless, as I suspect you know; but I agree that women are still being fed the line that helping for the sake of helping should be enough and somehow asking for money casts women in a bad light.

Welcome back!

Oh gosh, that was a whole OTHER thing, but not surprising coming from Microsoft. Talk about a toxic corporate culture!

But that's off-topic... I really just want to be able to encourage my kids and not feed them a line.

As it ended up, she did exceptionally well, over 99th% in both subject tests and 145 IQ in COGAT math, 140 in logic, but effectively scored a 90 IQ verbally, so oh well. She's been recommended this year and now I have that whole thing to think about. Sigh.

At least with my second, who is really bright, I won't have this issue since she's in bilingual schooling which has turned out to be very challenging and very intellectually stimulating. The teaching team there is incredible.

just re the to tell/not tell what the test was for etc, what worked for us was telling DD4 that most schools were made for square pegs, some were for circle pegs and there were some for triangle pegs. She figured out she wasn't a square peg on her own, the test was to see if she was a triangle or a circle. We explained to her that even though she's a triangle she'll be going a square school because there aren't enough triangles to make a whole school in our town, BUT there are some very special teachers who can help triangles and squares at the same time.

It helped with the yes you're different but no better / worse issue

binip, my husband and I both work in the public sector as well, and both of us make less than half of what we could in the private sctor. In both of our cases, though, we really don't want to do the work we would have to do to make that money (basically...sell out, in DH's case especially). I do understand the feelings you have a little bit; DH especially sometimes feels like his expensive liberal arts education went to pot, but OTOH, there are many good things about his choice. It sounds like you don't feel the urgency to stay in the public sector anymore. Is it really too late? Because, and I apologize if I am blunt, you sound far more bitter than my DH on the days when I say, "Let's reassess...should you ditch this job and consult for XYZ Evil?"

It seems like money is more important to you than you realized it would be. I have a friend who is a raging, highly active liberal but who grew up in a very economically unstable household. We all thought she would grow up to be a poor activist, but instead she is an extremely wealthy IT manager who does do political stuff on the side. She really, really needed an stable lifestyle. I don't judge her for it. I get it.

Getting into "college" in the U.S. is easy. Only a small fraction of schools are highly selective, and not getting into the Ivies/MIT/Stanford does not mean not getting into college.

When you control for benefits and job stability, I think people in the public sector are better compensated than in the private sector on average. Biggs and Richwine found this to be the case for public school teachers. I think sometimes an error is made in looking at the right tail of the private sector earnings distribution, which does not prove anything about the median.

I don't think what he said was unreasonable, but nowadays political correctness matters more than truth. "Why Men Earn More" (2005) by Farrell is a good, realistic book on the issue.

People always flog this horse about public sector benefits. My husband (in the public sector his whole working life) has excellent PTO, I'll grant you, but our insurance benefits are not great. Overall, our health expenses run us more than our mortgage payments every year (we have a cheap mortgage and some expensive conditions and prescriptions). Job stability--it is hard to get fired, I grant you, but not so hard to get laid off.

I and DH both chose the public sector for reasons of family friendliness, work life balance and personal integrity. On the whole, we have no regrets and like our jobs, and are perfectly sure We have made the right choice. But with DS2 born with major special needs, we currently need our parents financial support in order to keep up our lifestyle (which isn't extravagant in any way, but not frugal either). They do gift stuff such as family vacations we would not otherwise be able to afford, take us out to nice restaurants, provide free babysitting, pay for the kids musical lessons, have skipped in for private daycare etc...there is a lot of help that keeps us in decent comfort. We'd certainly have many moments of having to forgo things we'd like to do as a family or being able to offer our kids, and maybe I might feel bitter if I did.

The way it is, I do, occasionally, have moments of simple green envy. Because when I look at the private sector, I do look at the right tail of the earnings curve which is where we would both be according to our qualifications. I am not so unreasonable to think that I would have been able to raise the three kids I have the way I want to raise them and still be on that end of the curve - we do milk the public sector benefits in the possibilities for parental leave, part time work and job security for what it's worth. But don't you ever tell me that if I had given the public sector my all, worked full time at the highest level of government, the financial compensation including benefits, would have come in any way close to what I could have made in the private sector, selling my soul and billing somewhere around 5 to 10 times what I now make in an hour. I am not looking at the alternative career prospects of a social studies teacher.

Are you suggesting women shouldn't self-advocate or self-market in the same way that men have proven to do successfully?

Nadella's comment rather explicitly suggests that women do not merit equal voice in their career management, holding experience, performance, and qualifications equal, by dint of their being female. It's another strain of paternalistic anti-woman messaging, and subtly anti-freedom of speech. If he can't legally limit women through legitimate power, he'll exert his coercive and referent power to induce them to self-handicap by poisoning the work culture. Tone at the top is everything when it comes to anti-woman enculturation.

Don't for a second fantasize that Nadella's comments are in any way innocuous. To brush it off as an offense against political correctness is to give his statement tacit approval.

Here is the full quote from Nadella. It is certainly debatable, but I don't think it is outrageous, and it probably reflects what he thinks. It's not going to benefit women or men if people are only free to say what is politically correct. He's saying that demanding at each point in time the maximum compensation that your employer might give to prevent you from leaving can create "good karma". That is plausible. He has climbed to the top at Microsoft. Maybe he know something about how to scale the corporate ladder?

It's amazing what you can find on the internet.
http://forums.welltrainedmind.com/t...believe-is-unethical/page-2#entry5986995
So there you go. You've all been tarred with the same brush. That's what you get for trying to help.

There wouldn't be such a problem if he were advocating biding your time to all employees. But that's not what he said. His comments discourage women specifically--recall that Nadella addressed a conference of women in computing--from seeking compensation in line with that of equivalent male colleagues. I guess while males receive higher compensation for equal work, women can feed, clothe, shelter, and educate their children with their banked karma. Sorry Bostonian, I don't buy it.

Well that dovetails nicely with the discussion of karma.

Hey binip, I commented on your thread, but my kids were tested once each through the public schools, by a complete stranger, without a parent anywhere in the building, after passing a prescreening initiated by the school system. Just FTR. (Can they have public services now?)

Many of the kids on this forum got private testing because they are 2E. (My kids are not.) I'd guess half the forum here has 2E kids?

just deleted my post because I got crazy mad at this thread and wrote some things that I 100% agree with but may have been irrelevant to Binip upon second reading. I will say though - you need to get over your martyrdom through your children - nobody is going to thankyou for it, it's like not feeding your kids because there are starving children in Africa.

Oops.

It's pretty silly to look at teachers, because the markets are highly unequal. The public sector marketplace for teaching is vast compared to the private sector, and it's also far more demanding, with greater requirements for credentialing, etc.

Where the marketplace is robust in both sectors, you tend to see competitive pricing between the two. I've been an IT worker in both private and public sectors, which is in demand everywhere, and I found my wage/benefits structures in both to be comparable. Public sector features like comp time are offset by private sector features like annual bonuses. Other ubiquitous jobs get the same treatment.

And where the private marketplace is almost nonexistent, workers are screwed. In most areas of this country, we pay a pittance to social workers, law enforcement, etc. It's a wonder anyone takes those jobs.

Also compare allied health professionals, many of whom have analogous positions in public education and the healthcare industry: OTs, PTs, SLPs, psychs, MSWs/LMHCs, etc.

And basically the same credentialling.

I would say rant away. It's not just the OP's choices with their own family that are an issue. It is that the OP has expressed views/myths that are harmful to gifted education in general, and which are the kind of views/myths that are making life harder for all of us.

I agree. OP, I think you were mixing two problems and seeing them as only one. Problem 1: my kid needs some kind of accommodation because she's gifted. Problem 2: people try to prep their non-gifted kids into gifted programs for a variety of reasons.

Problem 2 is not a reason to deny an accommodation for your daughter in problem 1. Don't let your opinion about problem 2 affect your response to problem 1.


The difference in the IT sector is that IT workers tend to be highly skilled in an area that most people aren't skilled in at all. Compare to teachers who often aren't skilled at all in what they teach (e.g. K-8 mathematics!). Most people wouldn't even be capable of getting a degree in engineering and only ~4% of undergraduate degrees in the US in 2009 were in this field (source; page 3). This means that the supply is very low compared to teaching, where ~14% of all degrees were awarded in 2009.

Also, IT workers are constantly evaluated in a meaningful way. Not writing your code? Not keeping up with your security task list? You're fired. IT people don't get tenure and get rewarded for doing a good job.

The salary bump in public sector IT is a response to what people get in the private sector. No one who's even average in IT would work for low pay barring extreme circumstances.


Where I live (as in, most of this state), cops and others in the category you mentioned are retiring in their mid-50s with 100K+ pensions. Some people get 200K+ pensions. Plus they all get healthcare for life. I have to go, but will try to find a link later.

I have struggled with this thread as I am confused about some of the turns it has taken. I did read what was written on the other forum and that made me more confused, particularly about what was understood as Giftedness.

This is from one of binip's earlier posts:

"I do have an idea of a services-needing gifted child, but that is not my image of a smart child, a bright child, or a high performing child. It is rather the type of child who is so driven to engage that refusing her the opportunity could be painful. It is for this child that gifted programs exist. The high-critical, high-creativity, does not function in the classroom environment kid. I mean most kids are bored with rote learning. Everyone hates worksheets designed for remedial learners. With gifted kids it is something different.

Otherwise, why spend public money on it?

Anyway... Reading this message board gives me the feeling that I could probably test until I found her awesomeness, if I needed that number."

There were a couple of things in that for me. I totally agree about that children who need services are different to the bright or high performing students. I also agree that giftedness isn't all about the number but IQ tests are one of the few external measures accepted by schools to access services. A high IQ is a valid measure, but there are gifted kids who still aren't identified by the current intelligence measures, particularly 2 E kids and it can take repeated tests and different assessments to provide a true picture of their capabilities, if then. That isn't the same as gaming the system or prepping.

Special needs services apply to children at both ends of the exceptional spectrum, although there doesn't seem to be so much competition to access classes for students who have IQ's below the average. Interestingly, while there is much greater acceptance that an IQ test result identifies students at one end of exceptionality, there continues to be controversy about what constitutes an IQ in the gifted range. Perhaps the changing nature of the instruments available for testing and the variability in the response from gifted individuals is part of the confusion but it is quite clear that there are outliers at either end and they have needs which are not met easily in the standard education system.

The problem of competition for gifted services continues to be fraught with angst as there is no standardised external rating of what constitutes a true gifted program, as opposed to a program that could be equally valuable to all high achieving students. However, a non-gifted student shouldn't be feeling comfortable and thriving in a gifted class and if they are, then they have been misidentified or the class is not truly serving the needs of the gifted. Prepping non gifted shouldn't work if the service is truly for the gifted as prepped non gifted kids should find their needs aren't being serviced in that class. The fact that it happens goes back to my earlier point about how to identify a program for the gifted.

There are difficulties identifying gifted students but they are a real population. 2e students are a population who can be a particular challenge as so many of you have struggled with, both to identify and find an appropriate placement for education that deals with both exceptionality Es.

The myths surrounding giftedness do make life difficult and aggravating for all of us. We come here so that we can be supported by people who understand the problems.

Agreed. Identifying a program for the gifted is different than identifying kids for a program.

would love to but I try as much as possible not to contribute negatively. I have nothing at all nice to say about this thread so I'm going to follow mother's advice

This is such an excellent response in light of binip's description of what she feels constitutes true giftedness, I have to say. The "high-critical, high-creativity, does not function in the classroom environment kid" is exactly the child who may not be easily identifiable with a standard boxed test.

I don't personally agree that this is the only child who need services. I actually think that's district- and school-dependent, though, which is quite a can of worms. My children need services in their area but might not have needed them in a high-performing, wealthy district where they were "less rare." They are not 2E and they are both conventional enough in what they learn that they don't have to go outside typical educational structuring to function well. But they get bored as hell.