Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums General Discussion I am a hot housing helicopter parent?

I help out daily in the media center at my son's school. His accomplishments are his own as well as his shortcomings.

There is one media specialist for over 1100 kids. I think it is absurd that she doesn't have a paraprofessional to help her or a clerk. Back in the 90s 1100 kids would have had 2 media specialists and a clerk/paraprofessional working.

There are about 10 volunteers at our school on a daily basis and about another 5 on a weekly basis. They are trying to recruit volunteers to help in the lunchroom (which is in chaos trying to feed so many kids in 4 hours). Yeah sure having me there has its small advantages but they have received well over 300 hours of free labor from me this year alone. (The sign in computer computes the hours). Any other parent is welcome to volunteer too (those that aren't working two jobs). We don't even care if they speak English (which is why a majority of them are hesitant to volunteer).

Things may have changed but in my DD's elementary school the parent teacher helpers were run by what appeared to be an all-grown-up-but-still-a-bunch-of-Heathers-mummy-mafia.

They were a very insular bench and on the couple of occasions early on that I volunteered (I have pretty flexible working arrangements most days) I was pretty well ostracized and glared at.

I went originally because I believed in strong community involvement and support
but I realised that it was not about that in that particular instance pretty fast.

I realize that this varies from school district to school district but there was something of a sinister vibe there.

Yes, you need to join this institution in order to mediate between your child and the system.

If you choose to not join them, its like choosing not to vote and then complaining that the wrong person won.

This old thread may also be of interest: Remind me to never be Homeroom Mom again, and this old post, as they reinforce what you are describing. You are not alone!

I didn't read this whole thread, but agree with whoever said that gifted kids should have similar levels of challenge as "regular" kids. Most average 4th graders do not want to do math homework, but it's still required and expected. Those kids are not "pushed", they are just expected to have a reasonable work ethic. The same should apply to gifted kids...just because they are gifted doesn't mean they get a free pass. They need to be given work that is suitably challenging even if they are not thrilled to do it. Not all gifted kids are motivated and driven, some are just plain lazy. My second grader was accelerated 3 grades for math. If he had not been accelerated he would probably have 5 minutes of problems each night like 37-8 and would learn nothing. The only reason why he might want to do that, is because it would be over and done with quickly and then he'd get to play Minecraft. But the teacher instead makes him do harder work that takes longer. It may be "pushy", in that other kids his age aren't expected to do that level of work, but it is also teaching him a work ethic and to work through things that might be a tad difficult. I don't think this is "hothousing". Hothousing is more extreme--where the child is simply incapable of doing the work or it takes away from other worthwhile activities.

If hothousing is defined as having a child do more difficult work than age peers, even if the child doesn't like doing it, then any school that ability groups and gives the brighter kids more difficult work is hothousing those kids who are not motivated/driven but still placed in the "high group". It's not about what the child "wants", IMO...it's about giving them appropriate challenges, with "hothousing" being the extreme or inappropriate version of that, causing harm to the child. I also think it depends on the activity. All kids need to learn math, even if they don't like it. But gymnastics? Or soccer? Not so much. If those activities are "forced", just to give the parent an ego trip, that's a different story. The ironic thing is, most sport nut parents are not considered to be "hothousing" and it's socially acceptable, vs. a parent who signs their kid up for after-school math (because the school will not differentiate) is viewed with scorn.

I "require" my child to do a lot of things in addition to his school academics. These may include after schooling, sports, music, robotics etc. I am trying to develop a well rounded child and this is my way of doing it in spite of the drawbacks in his schooling. My child is good natured and energetic and enthusiastic and I try to find very interesting ways to accomplish what I require him to do - but, if both our personalities were any different, it might start to look like hothousing or Tigermothering.

To me, Hot housing is when a child is not able to accomplish the levels of output that the parent expects and the parent makes the child work night and day to measure up to expectations with a lot of displeasure and consequences for not producing the output that the parent expects.

Lack of free, unstructured time is not an indicator of hothousing - most intense, gifted kids that I know are busy doing something structured that they hardly have any free time (I know a few that are very good at violin, chess and soccer and each of them is so busy at a young age).

I think the question is whether you would be doing these things if it was not part of some sort of imposed program.

I know that when I was younger, I had very little interest in any of the activities that I was doing. So, when I was no longer required to do them, I stopped doing them because the reason that I was doing them had precisely nothing to do with the actual activity.

The activity was a means to some other end.

Blackcat, I think that you've nailed it-- if it's about genuine desire to do right by the child's long-term interests, while respecting the child's innate developmental arc, then it's unlikely to be hot-housing.

It may still not (quite) be healthy, if the parents are not being realistic about that developmental arc... but then again, that tends to drift into "it's not really about the child that I have in front of me" as well.

If it's about the parents' ego-- at all, then it probably IS hot-housing, or something like it.

I also find it strange that hot-housing in athletics is seen as completely okay, and yet those same rabid parents who scream at their kids, the coaches, etc. from the sidelines of a soccer or hockey game think that, in general, a chess/competition maths coach for a 10yo is "over the top" and quite possibly "abusive."


Uhhhhh-huh. You keep tellin' yourself that.

DD was placed rather inappropriately in pre-algebra (the course before Algebra I) when she was still 8. I want to take a step backwards because with her poor EF ability and attention, I think she would struggle too much with Algebra next fall. However, there are probably other parents who want to push their kids forward, just so that their kid is one of the "top" kids, even if their kid may struggle with it and not be ready. I think this is hothousing.

Unstructured play has so many cognitive, emotional, and social benefits that failure to provide it should be considered a failure to properly nurture your child in all three domains.
http://www.psmag.com/books-and-culture/value-unstructured-play-time-kids-81177
http://www.npr.org/blogs/ed/2014/08...y-childs-play-helps-build-a-better-brain