Hi,

R, darling,
What difference does it make? How does this affect your life?
Who cares what some other mom does? Is it your sister? Even if it's a family member, if she hasn't asked for your advice, don't share!

A child can't be enriched much beyond what their 'Headmeat' is able to take in. Justing having a Mom who wants to put that much energy into teaching their child at this early age is a pretty good sign of having a 'brighter than average' Mom, which generally correlates with a 'brighter than average' baby.

Part of being a good mom is to be 'tuned in' to baby and open to what baby likes to do. Not all of us are equally talented in this area. But even if we mess this up, if we are sharing a part of ourselves with out child, then that is good too. Some folks make mistakes, and put too much emphasis on only one area. I think the 'not tuned in' can be a problem, but that it is in the area of academics can't be - there is no way to put 6oz. of water in a glass that holds 4oz.

Best Wishes,
Grinity

This is all my opinion - no scientific proof at all.

I have met some serious hothousers, including a mom who started flashcards with her infant in a high chair and would give him a bite of food only when he pointed to the right flashcard. THAT is hothousing from my perspective. Forced learning by withholding something else the child needs- affection or food or whatever.

Buying educational toys and showing the child LeapFrog games and videos really doesn't fall into hothousing in my book. That's just being an attentive parent who has fallen for the marketing ploy of educational toy companies. If the child has toys and they happen to have an academic twist, I don't really see the harm in that. Every toy is designed with some "learning" component, whether old wooden blocks or a letter-pillar from LeapFrog.

Good comparison master of none. I agree, but will add, when that child is crying and screaming and kicking because he/she doesn't want to swim anymore, and the parent is forcing the swimming down his/her throat, regardless, then THAT is a problem. I've seen this done so many times with kids involved in sports, but it also happens with academics as well.

And my response to R is "they will all level out in 3rd grade"...







ok, bad joke. I know. Sorry!

I think it depends....
DD 2.8 had been recognizing some letters on her own since about 22 months, at 29 months I bought the leap frog letter factory and after one viewing she knew them all, upper and lower case and their sounds and pointed them out everywhere. Many of her toys are educational, we have a good mix, but what she plays with 99 precent of the time would be considered educational, but that is her choice, she is much more in to workbooks, puzzles, mazes, rhyming games, etc then dolls, her play kitchen, etc.

She has been asking how to read for several months...I mean even getting upset when looking at a new book saying "I don't know these words yet" very tearfully. So I have started showing her some site words while reading, which she learned in 2 days and now points out everywhere, plus she had been reading signs and street signs on her own for a while...she even asks to go for walks to read signs. I have started to show her how to sound out words now because she is so eager...if it works great, if not then she will learn when she's ready.

I guess you can't really know unless you are with them 24/7. DD has always been very advanced verbaly and mathmatically, but I would say mainly if I introduce a concept to her, or even mention a new concept, she tends to grasp it immediately....no flash cards, or drilling, just one conversation and she knows it....to me the drilling would be more hothousing, but I also believe no matter what yopu introduce when, if a child is not ready then he or she won't grasp it.

I have to say that I agree with Grinity. Why does this matter? Is there a reason you want to know whether this particular kid is gifted? There is simply no way for an outsider to know to what extent a child has been pushed, or how advanced the child would be if there had been no pushing.

As far as "learning" toys are concerned, certainly they are common enough in households in which kids do not know letters and colors, etc., at barely 2 years old. That said, of course it is also possible for a child to learn these things early and not be gifted. I don't think Ruf (or any expert) would disagree with that. Can you tell the difference between a gifted kid and a kid who is ahead but not gifted? Maybe, sometimes.

I don't think it matters at 26 months if the child is gifted or not. The child is obviously interested in what the mom is showing him so what's the harm? I don't feel like any learning is a bad thing unless a child is forced to do it.

I see kids riding up front when I suspect they may be a few pounds under the legal limit. I see parents giving 32oz sodas to their kids. I see parents grilling their kids with flashcards in the park. But these are not my kids and there's no real danger to those kids or anyone else... so why in the blazes would I care? I'm sure not going to say anything.

On the not too distant flip-side, I guarantee there are parents whose knickers get wickedly twisted when they see pictures of my children handling real guns. Or riding their bikes without helmets and Kevlar vests. Or getting chocolate chips AND maple syrup on their pancakes. The list is endless...

The absolute number one plaything in our household for seven years running is a toy that has caused more sibling battles than any other and would have CPS knocking on my door if they knew about it... a fully-functional, 100% genuine 6-ft length of mountain climber's rope.

So I guess I'd have a hard time with criticizing a parent who drills their kids with workbooks and flashcards. After all, according to some measures, our kids are just lucky to live through the day.

Think of it another way, at least the mother cares enough to educate the child.

As to being forced to learn, I was forced to learn a lot of things in school that I didn't have any interests in. I am not sure it's necessary bad. If I wasn't forced to learn multiplication table in grade school, I wouldn�t know how much fun graduate-level math could be!

Haha...we had a huge length of rope here too that caused endless fights. I had to eventually hide it because I couldn't take the bickering anymore.

Everyone seems to be jumping on R with the message that there's nothing wrong with exposing children to academics early and no point in saying anything, but
(a) there's no suggestion in R's OP that s/he intends to say anything to the more, so I'm not sure where everyone's getting that from;
(b) the OP does say "most other toy options [are] not available?" and "The mother [...] only wants toys that are educational related."
Does anyone here think it's harmless for children to be allowed ONLY educational toys? (As usually interpreted: obviously there's a sense in which all toys are educational, but I don't think that's the sense the OP used.) I don't, and that seemed to be the main question.

I guess it would make sense to know what he means by all educational toys.

I guess in that sense I'm guilty too. We don't have cable and let DS watch an occasional cartoon but for the most part if he wants to watch TV it's something educational on PBS. I won't get him a DS but will let him play with his Leapster since he can learn from it. The thing is he's into all of that. If I put a monster truck in front of him or a globe he'd pick the globe to play with so that's the kind of toys I buy him. And if he's having fun and learning then I get dual usage out of the toys.

Hm. I guess I have trouble seeing the line, if there is a line. And I guess I think it's okay for kids to have no toys, if they've got things they can use as toys (sticks, rocks, boxes etc.), so why wouldn't it be okay to just have "educational" toys? I mean, if what that means is all electronic toys, that is certainly not to my taste...but I'd consider it to be a matter of taste (and I wouldn't condemn those with whom I differ in matters of taste, in large part because my taste is far from the norm).

Sure, lots of educational toys here too :-) But that's different from telling other people to only get him educational toys, for example, which is what I was imagining (admittedly on limited evidence) from what the OP said. (Actually I try not to make suggestions about what other people might get my DS, on the whole. On average, I make better guesses about what he will like than other people do - but he has loved some things that would never have occurred to me to give him.)

Something I found very reassuring: DS-then-5 was asked to write about his favourite present, and chose to write about the magnetic fraction tiles we'd given him, above many other more obviously enticing presents. This is the one I'll quote if anyone ever accuses me of being a pushy parent - a pushy parent may be able to give their 5yo fraction tiles, but can't make the 5yo pick them as favourite!

There are signs at this age to tell if the child is gifted and maybe it is for the HG+ kids that it is noticeable. Humor and empathy are the two that come to mind.

As far as what the mother is doing, would it be considered hot housing? Educational toys are so popular and marketed so well. The funny thing is the ones that started it: Baby Einstein, has come out recently with full refunds because they marketed their product as a tool to make babies smarter and it isn't true which has led to lawsuits. But what you describe clearly makes you feel uncomfortable and it could very well just be different parenting styles OR it is a gut reaction to spotting hot-housing and I know someone posted the joke about evening out but there is truth to it in that those kids that were pushed tend to even out. The sad thing is some gifted kids will too because they aren't stimulated, but that is another topic for sure.

Sorry I didn't mean to give the wrong impression as to my interest. I am involved in my local gifted resource group. We hold meetings for families of gifted preschoolers and this topic has been of interest. I use the example because I thought it helps explain where the confusion is in understanding the difference. I would not ever interfere with a mother's decisions and to each his on. I'm just trying to understand whether or not there is a difference. It's interesting and has brought on some good discussions in our parent group. thanks

Hi R

Before I could answer your question, I'd like to know if you really mean that there are no other options for the child except the popular idea of educational toys -falshcards, leapster etc. Are there seriously no balls around, no bikes, no cars, dolls, soft toys, games, make-believe toys, crayons for drawing ...? It really would be kind of strange if that were the case ... or are there just less of these than you consider appropriate? Whatever the case, I really wouldn't focus on it too much on it anyway as others have said.

At least I do not know but I have come to the conclusion that no one can give me the answer. I'm sure you can comfortably say that he is very advanced to his age:)

I also have to agree with Grinity and ask why does it matter to you? Could you try to be happy with the mother and share her excitement about the little boys development? It drives me nuts that we can not share DD's achievements with SIL&BIL as they seem to be afraid if she wold be more advanced than their boys (the boys are really smart kids so they have no reason to be jealous). It should not be away from their kids giftedness if DD is advanced. You can see I really can not stand comparing kids, we should enjoy all of them equally regardless of they abilities.

I would answer this with the "sweet spot" response.

I believe that kids learn more quickly and easily what they are developmentally ready to learn. Pushing them to learn something--like reading--too early for that particular child carries a cost, in that the child is not learning other things that s/he is ripe to learn because the child has to work so much harder at the skill. This seems counterproductive to me. Why swim upstream?

So I'm not a fan of forced early learning, of letters or math or anything. If the child is interested, then that indicates a readiness, and then I'm all for it. I really believe that child-led learning is the way to go.

With that said, unless I suspected a case of child abuse, I wouldn't say anything to another parent about their choices. Parenting is hard enough without being second-guessed by others.

[quote=oli
I also have to agree with Grinity and ask why does it matter to you? Could you try to be happy with the mother and share her excitement about the little boys development? It drives me nuts that we can not share DD's achievements with SIL&BIL as they seem to be afraid if she wold be more advanced than their boys (the boys are really smart kids so they have no reason to be jealous). It should not be away from their kids giftedness if DD is advanced. You can see I really can not stand comparing kids, we should enjoy all of them equally regardless of they abilities.

[/quote]

As I posted last, I am trying to "understand" the differences and if there is a difference? It has come up in our group discussions and it's not at all in a way that suggests anyone is less than excited for each others children. (I guess that's what I get for trying to post while my little kids are running around the room screaming and playing, things don't come out right.) This particular mom has been involved in these discussions as the newer Moms try to sort out the potential giftedness of their child. We all try to understand the difference between parent driven and child driven learning. All wanting to understand the extremes on either side. I'm sorry if this came across wrong. I am taking offense to being jumped on about the question. I don't think I'm the first or the last parent to want to understand it.

I've googled the topic and can't find any resources to help answer our questions. I thought I'd ask the experts on this forum for their thoughts. I'm surprised by most of the reactions as it almost seems as though it's threatening to suggest the parents are directing the child's learning.

As far as comparing kids, I have experienced these issues so I understand . With PG kids in my household, I've seen first hand what it has done to neighborhood friendships, family relationships, etc and I'm very sensitive to that. Realistically, I don't think we can have parent discussion groups or forums without some level of "comparing" going on (for good or bad.) It's just the nature of our situations.

R

I think others were worried about the potential for judging others. So often parents of GT kids are thought to be hothousing, even when that's not what's happening.

I think no one meant offense, samson11. I'm sorry you feel jumped on. I think this may just be a nerve for the collective audience you're writing to. You know?

I definitely don't think you're the only person who is unsure about the differences and similarities between hothousing and child-led accelerated learning. It's a common topic for discussion here. I suspect the problem is in the specifics that you mentioned--this one woman's case--that bothered people.

But maybe I'm off-base...

Wait, what? You mean I sold those DVDs when I could've gotten refunds?

In all seriousness though, hothousing is an act and being gifted is a trait, so in reality, can you even compare the two?

And maybe the mother of this child chooses only educational toys because she is not aware of the positive affects of playing with those that are not marketed as such. The part that might be the issue in R's post is the intentions behind the mother's reasons, which is again back to master of none's comments.

And finally, DSalmost6 would choose a Monster Truck over a globe, as his favorite gift, but to me that doesn't make him any less gifted than one who chooses a globe (and I'm just using this as the example since it was given) who has identical test scores, same age, etc. Loving to learn and being gifted aren't the same thing.

sorry to jump on ya' R - I was confused.

In my book, calling someone a helicopter type parent just isn't ever anything but an insult.

Anyway, your question makes more sense in context of your playgroup.

When I try to figure this out scientifically, I look at the research done on IQs of twins raised seperatly. My understanding of the research is that it's strong, but not perfect, and shows that Adoptive moms with higher IQs than their adopted kids can raise the IQ a few points, compared to the 'other twin' but that over time the IQ's of the twins converge, and the effect is lost. I interpret that to mean that the child brings their own likes and interests into the environment and shape the environment.

Now that I understand the question, I agree that it is an intersting one.

Love and More Love and opps, sorry!
Grinity

I'm sorry that you felt attacked. I've felt like I've had to defend my parenting the whole 5 years that my DS has been alive I've been accused of pushing (because how else could he know what he does) as I'm sure a lot of parents here have been. This just strikes a nerve with me

If the child really is gifted that will come out at some point. The guy that tested my son said that they are reluctant to test kids under 5 because of just what you've said. Parents think their child is gifted because they know this or that when it's only because they've been exposed to it.

Again sorry!

I think a lot of people here have been judged by others on the basis of what their children can do. I know I have. I have had a school district treat me like a pushy mom and then get very uncomfortable when their assessment tests proved that what I had been saying was right. The idea of judging another mom on her toy choices sort of falls under that umbrella.

However that wasn't what you were talking about. Your question is actually a very valid one. How CAN you tell between children that are being pushed and children that are gifted? For example if you run a group/school/whatever that only allows in gifted children knowing this would matter a lot especially if testing wasn't an option (age, funds, etc...).

I have worked with a lot of kids in my life and what I've noticed is that it's a matter of quality, not quantity. You can show any kid the alphabet often enough and they will eventually get it. You can show many/most gifted kids the alphabet a couple of times and they will have it down. Ditto for numbers, math, topics of interest, etc... The gifted kid will not only pick up the alphabet, but then point out the letters around the house or start to sound out words. When they are little there is almost an insatiable hunger to soak in more information.

Play tends to be different as well. Imaginative play often starts earlier and level of detail is much higher. There is often a great obsession with one or two topics at a time. They also seem to NEED more stimulation than other kids.

Example: Almost all kids can and will learn to read. Most kids start to sound out words and read low level readers through K-1. My son had a few sight words at 3, but then taught himself to read in one month shortly after he turned 4 and is now reading around 2nd/3rd grade level at 5 yrs old.

Unless you spend time with the children without the parents around it can be hard to tell gifted from trained. Anecdotal stories from the parent showing learning initiative on the part of the child (like the one above) are a hint. If you can observe the child playing with others of the same age who you know are on the normal development track, you can look for use of concepts more advanced than those of the playmate, more intricacy in the games, more imagination, more leaps of logic, etc... Also look for expressions of empathy and compassion beyond their age.

Hope that helps a little.

One of the earliest signs I saw with my particular HG+ child was an incredible persistence when he was interested in something. He learned his letters early--he had most of them down by 14 or 15 months--but not because he'd seen them once or twice. He had wooden alphabet puzzles that he OBSESSED over! He'd play with them every waking moment if I let him. I'd try to put them away and get him to play with something else--anything else!--but he'd throw a fit if he couldn't use his puzzles. He HAD to learn how to put the puzzles together AND what the letters were. I think the complexity of the problem the puzzles posed to him were why he loved them so much. It was all he wanted to do, and he would not be dissuaded.

Most toddlers that age are far more distractible than that.

He did something similar with learning to spin those stackable plastic "donuts" made by Fisher Price. We adults would spin them on the floor for fun, and DS8 apparently decided wanted to learn how. For days, for hours at a time, he would practice his technique until he was far better at spinning the rings than anyone else. I'm not sure he was a year old at the time. There was no way he had the eye-hand coordination to learn this "skill," but he was so focused on it that he managed it, and he figured out a better new technique that none of the adults in his life used.

So DS8 didn't exactly learn things faster at his young age--speed has never been his strong suit! But he zeroed in on things that were really much too hard for a kid his age and he worked on them until he learned them, no matter how hard the adults in his life tried to keep him from them.

He's probably not the stereotypical HG+ kid, though... (If there is such a thing! LOL!)

(And before anyone asks, he's not on the autism spectrum. He was just smart enough to get that there were things he didn't yet know, and focused enough to chase after them until he learned them.)

Just another take...

Hence the almost all comments!

Oh and I've definitely noticed the determination and focus compared to ND kids also.

Oh, yes, Wyldkat. My post wasn't intended as a criticism of yours. Just a reflection on my own child.

Now that he's older, he does pick up on things after only a couple of exposures. But when he was younger, that's not how I would have described him. I'd have talked about his persistence and his laser-like focus.

It's ok, I didn't take it as a criticism. There really is no way to classify our kids at even close to 100%! I was sort of trying to say that in my post with all the almosts, but never got around to actually saying it.

This was my DD. She found some little board books for letters and became obsessed with them at age 6 mths. Hours of 'What's this?' and 'What's that?' as she would bring the book over for us to go through. I really had no idea that she was learning the alphabet but by 9 mths she made it clear that she knew all her letters and a few months later she knew all the sounds each letter makes. There is just an intensity with the HG+ kids. Their attention spans are amazing. We would sit in awe over DD's ability to be absorbed in something and wouldn't move from that task for 20 to 30 minutes. And this was when she was still a baby. As she got older her attention span just got longer and with her imagination she can spends hours entertaining herself.

I don't think I could say she showed what your son did with the spinning of the rings because we have a perfectionist and she expects to just be able to do it the first time which I think has been part of our problem when it came to potty training. It was not until recently when I talked to her about practicing and how with practice she will find it comes easier that we turned the corner. And when she finally gave in to that idea she was potty trained in less than a week. But what a struggle it has been to get her to even try.

I also want to say that I think what has been described has more to do with kids that are in the higher range of gifted and if a child does not show this intensity it doesn't mean they are not gifted or even HG+ because it isn't easy to lump them all in one category. I remember reading some posts in reference to Ruf's book and how a lot of parents with HG+ kids did not see the signs during infancy that Ruf talks about which is yet more proof that every child is an individual.

forgive me if this has ben said already, read through all the post but am tired....

one thing that sets my DD 2.8years apart form her peers besides her knowledge of things that others her age have not yet grasped but I guess could be taught threw hothousing is her

sense of humor- DD has had a very witty, dry, and sarcastic ense of humor...very adult in nature, since before she was 2....it still takes us aback and oters definitly have witnessed and commented about that

empethy- dd is very empethetic and compasionate....far more then her peers

imaginative play- this is actually something that highly frusterates DD while playing with agemates.....She as very in deapth imaginative play, creats huge senarios and monologes for the characters and even has moral issues involved
(example: Two of DD dinosuars were playing with each other while another one was watching them....they were talking about how they were friends and did everything together and the other dinosuar could not join them. Then one of the dinosaurs used his tail to knock his friend off the table....the dino that had been left out then asked him "why did you do that to him? I thought you were friends" )
Definitly not what you would see in the play of a ND 2.5 year old. She also does not like parellel play that many kids of 2 do, and she goes up and tries to initiate games and gets frusterated that they do not understand and play along.

Also the way she thinks and can logic....she saw a truck parked not in a parking place but in front of the curb at wal-mart. She asked me why it was parked there and not in a parking spot. I asked her why did she think and she responded "All the parking spots are small, they would fit a car, but not a mac truck, so he had to park there." She uses deductive reasoning on a daily baises, something that develops typically later in development and not something that can really be hothoused.....so I guess I would look at not just knowledge but lots of other indicators in a child that is young. I believe this is where a lot of difference can be seen between gifted children and ND children who have been hothoused.

This is the kind of thinking my kids did on a daily basis that I never thought anything about. At the time, I thought, of course toddlers intuitively know this kind of thing and use logic. They had intensity on certain things and persistence on other things. Lot's of questions and bigger kid anxieties and angst. Neither were particularly interested in words, letters, writing. They had their alphabet sounds somehow. My daughter could write before 3. But really because her brother was in kindergarten and she'd see his homework every night. My daughter was interested in reading briefly at 4 and stopped. They had non-academic preschools experience. And here we are anyway.

This is a really interesting topic. We have SO many early readers in our area that I have to wonder what is going on. Truly, at the beginning of K, I thought my kid would be a remedial student. Sure, he can describe heating duct and plumbing systems in great detail, do lego sets marked for 12+, multiply and divide, but he can't read "Go Dog Go". Turns out he learned to read at that level in a few weeks time after we thought to bring home a few early readers. I think it's great to encourage learning, play games, bring out the early readers, etc. But our kids seemed not to have suffered at all by not having an academic pre-K experience. I kind of wonder if they would have been early readers if I would have let them watch Sesame street, play starfall, introduce phonics, read early readers while they followed along? Who knows. I guess my point is, I don't think it really mattered for my kids. They are who they are.