Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums General Discussion Very depressing article

I think there's a subtle point many parents will miss when they read "their peers catch up with them-usually by grade 4." Most parents will probably think of peers as age-mates instead of intellectual-mates. If the child is just as bright as the early reader then I agree with her statement. Unfortunately, many people will miss this distinction and it's more fodder for the early reader=pushy parent assumption.

Another part of the article that concerns me is this quote by Keplinger (Palo Alto School District - Parent Education)
While I agree with the importance of those things, I'm afraid the statement will be used as justification to deny letting asynchronous gifted children work at their appropriate levels. The "no protein unless you eat your broccoli" analogy comes to mind.

I also agree with Ms. Friz about the advantage of an extensive knowledge base that early readers can develop. I think of that knowledge base as providing hooks on which to hang new knowledge. If there isn't a hook to hang the new knowledge, it may not take.

I have to disagree with the walking analogy. Almost all top athletes showed enormous physical talents at an early age. Sehorn and Tillman are prime examples. Both men's mothers have extensively documented this. Both mothers also pushed their sons and sacrificed for them.

Here is an example.

"When when Jason [Sehorn] was a toddler, Nancy told people that he was going to be an Olympic star. When he was four, she put him on a large girl's bicycle and couldn't get over how he shifted his little body from left to right as he pumped the pedals, saying, "I can do this, I can do this, I can do this." Nancy bought Jason a nine-dollar skateboard when he was six and watched in awe as he glided along the street."

Tillman was doing ab rollers before he could walk. I've read his biography and it is stunning what he did at an early age.

So I would say the teacher has no empirical evidence to back up what she was saying. The analogy is wrong, too.

I have to disagree here as well. Mr W is learning patience and fine motor skills because he wants to learn more - playing with the keyboard, waiting for screens to change, sharing time on the TV with us, sharing reading time with us, learning how to use the remote, spending time reading on his own at daycare while other kids do their thing, and then changing his focus to do other things when he is engrossed in his toys. He also helps around the house.

If he was an ND kid, he would not play with all these things or encounter conflicts or develop helping skils like this until later - so he is learning other life skills at an earlier age.

So, again, I have to disagree with the "experts."

They do not see gitedness as connected to other things - they focus on one skill - and not on how this skill lifts up others. Their model of child development is flawed.

Hi - I'm new to this forum, but I just had to comment to agree with Val. My feeling is that not giving early readers more challenging material in school might have a great deal to do with them losing their edge.

I'm in a frustrated mood right now because my first-grade son's teacher is stifling his advanced interests and skills by requesting that he not write about, say, the periodic table or neutron stars but rather what he did yesterday. He was an early, self-taught reader and is still three years or so ahead of his age peers in fluency and comprehension. His wide reading means he has a good grasp of all kinds of more advanced subjects. The GATE program at this school doesn't kick in until 4th grade and I don't think we should have to wait another three years before the school will help foster my son's special abilities. He's ready NOW. Grrr.

Thanks for listening.

I agree with the critics here, especially that the model of child development as a one-size-fits-all concept is flawed.

I don't really understand why a child can't learn to read until s/he's reached a certain level of "emotional growth." Questions:

1. How is emotional growth defined?

2. Who defines the appropriate level of "emotional growth" required for reading?

3. How is it measured?

4. Do we hold people back until they reach the required level?

Poking holes in vague statements like the one above is trivial. Yet too many educators stick to them and don't want to listen to criticism.

I had a terrible time persuading DS9's 2nd grade teacher that using him to teach other kids was bad for him. She saw the situation only from her perspective: "I was taught to use my best students." The idea was that the best students tutor struggling students while the teacher works with other kids.

She totally failed to see the practice from DS9's perspective: he wasn't allowed to learn new things or do his 5th grade math problems because he had to tutor someone. I tried explaining it to her this way, but she kept going back to what she'd been taught. I eventually wrote a cease-and-desist letter to the principal.

Val

Did you ask her, all nice and smiley, WHY?

If it was a single assignment to write about what he did yesterday, followed by everyone reading their "essays" aloud, her mandate makes sense. But if she's just trying to get the kids to practice writing, it doesn't make sense.

Have you tried writing to her and requesting a conference?

Argh. Sorry.

Val

Hi, Val -- no, not yet... my son just gave me the news yesterday. The assignment is a daily journal, for writing practice. When he writes about his day, it's usually something like "I played outside. I had fun." When he writes about what he's interested in, it's more like, "Atoms are too tiny to see. The parts of an atom are: protons, neutrons, electrons. Protons and neutrons are in the very center of the atom..." etc. So, he is getting much more practice and the quality is so much better when he's inspired. He even writes more neatly!

So, my next step is to talk to his teacher. I guess I also need to get him tested or something... I am just getting started with this educational advocacy thing... glad I found this forum... I will check out the resources here.

Well, then he can write about what he thought about.

DS6 can write about whatever he wants in his daily journal in K. The purpose is to practice writing and to learn new words. Maybe your son's teacher just never thought about the fact that such a narrowly defined assignment wouldn't work for everyone. I do wish they didn't have to draw a picture with each entry since ds gets distracted by having to do the 2 tasks and he just needs to focus on the writing.

OO-OOh. Good one.

Val