when do you know they're NOT gifted?

[EthiopianFood]

I've visited Hoagies and looked at the list of things to look for that can indicate giftedness. I understand the idea of processing ideas more quickly. Dd hasn't been early in any area. She seems to pay attention to what is going on, and is interested in what she sees, but she doesn't seem to understand information at an advanced level or anything (e.g. spoken words). She is only 20 months, but it seems that if a child is gifted, there would already be signs of this. My family goes on and on about how smart she is, but when I read what other children are doing at this age, I realize that she isn't doing anything out of the ordinary (or is even doing them later). This is on my radar only because I was labeled G/T (my brain is now shot after having a baby, and I'm wondering if it will ever rebound! :tongue_smilie:), so I always wondered if my children would have that trait as well.

 

At what age can you safely stop wondering if it will "show up" somehow?

[chanda7]

My first started "accelerating" around 18 months or so, with no particular signs before that. My second didn't start to "accelerate" until sometime around age 3 with great leaps at 4. I'm not sure if you are ever safe ;)

[asta]

I read once upon a time that the "great evener" was around age 7 or 8; meaning that, up until that age, one can't really tell if a kid is "gifted" or just "picks up on stuff fast".

 

Apparently, lots of kids pick up on stuff fast, but around 7 or 8, the ones who weren't (barring a learning or developmental disorder) catch up.

 

The kids who are "gifted" keep picking up on things fast, and excel in one or more areas in an in-depth or extremely rapid manner.

 

I found some old home movies where my son, at less than two, was wandering around having conversations with me and my husband and reading things. It made me laugh. People have always told us he was smart, and we've always thought so, but you know how it is when you're at home with your own kid 24/7/12 (and not seeing other people's kids at school) - it isn't as obvious that they're THAT far ahead... LOL

 

a

[8filltheheart]

I never look for giftedness in my kids simply b/c my view is that they are who they are. But, if I think back to when they were little like yours, my 15 yod was speaking in full paragraphs by 16 months and with a huge vocabulary. Now, she is a smart kid. She would probably be in all honors classes in school, but she is not what I would describe as gifted.

 

My 13 yos, otoh, didn't talk a lot until almost 2 1/2, struggled like crazy to learn how to read (didn't actually read well until 3rd grade), but is absolutely gifted in math and science and is pretty much out of my league when it comes to math (he is in alg 2 this yr, but his way of thinking about math is unique and correct at the same time......I am a follow the method in the book kind of person!)

 

So.....at 20 months, maybe you can tell. Time and understanding how they think and learn is what has revealed it to me.

[Nan in Mass]

That sounds rather like: "They all even out by third grade." Maybe that's where that comes from.

[Laura Corin]

That sounds rather like: "They all even out by third grade." Maybe that's where that comes from.

 

Are there early starters who, even with appropriate stimulation, even out? Or is it just that bright kids lose hope/succumb to social pressure/are invisible because of lack of differentiation by third grade?

 

FWIW Calvin knew all his letter sounds and digits by 18 months, while Hobbes didn't learn his letters until he was four. Calvin probably has a higher IQ, but Hobbes is also gifted, and has an energy and a curiosity that may well take him further.

 

Laura

[asta]

Are there early starters who, even with appropriate stimulation, even out? Or is it just that bright kids lose hope/succumb to social pressure/are invisible because of lack of differentiation by third grade?

 

FWIW Calvin knew all his letter sounds and digits by 18 months, while Hobbes didn't learn his letters until he was four. Calvin probably has a higher IQ, but Hobbes is also gifted, and has an energy and a curiosity that may well take him further.

 

Laura

 

The way I heard it, it was the former (bolded). And that only "gifted" kids kept going/took off, what ever someone wanted to call it.

 

I hate all of the terminology. I try and feed kid's head. It seems to eat a lot, LOL.

 

 

a

[JeanM]

I've visited Hoagies and looked at the list of things to look for that can indicate giftedness. I understand the idea of processing ideas more quickly. Dd hasn't been early in any area. She seems to pay attention to what is going on, and is interested in what she sees, but she doesn't seem to understand information at an advanced level or anything (e.g. spoken words). She is only 20 months, but it seems that if a child is gifted, there would already be signs of this. My family goes on and on about how smart she is, but when I read what other children are doing at this age, I realize that she isn't doing anything out of the ordinary (or is even doing them later). This is on my radar only because I was labeled G/T (my brain is now shot after having a baby, and I'm wondering if it will ever rebound! :tongue_smilie:), so I always wondered if my children would have that trait as well.

 

At what age can you safely stop wondering if it will "show up" somehow?

 

My experience was that that my two dc varied a lot in their milestones, but they are both gifted. Your dc is very young. Relax and enjoy! :001_smile:

 

FWIW, ds1 was late to walk and at age 2 could only say about 5 words. Once he started talking though, he never stopped. He is very verbal now! He also struggled with reading and now reads constantly at a very high level.

[Tree House Academy]

With my older son, it was when I brought him home in 4th grade. As a child, he worked massive puzzles with complete ease - a 500 piece double sided puzzle in just a matter of hours. The pieces were the size of a dime! It was impressive! LOL In ps, he was always termed "gifted" and made straight A's. The stories his teachers told me would just blow me away. Then, I brought him home. Perhaps if his ADHD didn't keep him from staying on task and his laziness didn't keep him from slopping down an answer to just about anything so he "can be done," I would see more "giftedness." To me, he is just a smart kid that is capable of a lot more than he puts effort into doing.

[Kuovonne]

I don't view giftedness as a yes/no type of thing. Neither of my children are gifted right now. My six year old is currently accelerated/advanced. In a few years, who knows? Maybe she will remain advanced. Maybe she will become gifted, although I doubt it. Maybe she will become average. Or, maybe she will drop down below average once she hits harder material, and start struggling because of undiagnosed learning disabilities. I fully believe that any of the above are possible, and I worry about the last case the most.

[zaichiki]

I don't view giftedness as a yes/no type of thing. Neither of my children are gifted right now. My six year old is currently accelerated/advanced. In a few years, who knows? Maybe she will remain advanced. Maybe she will become gifted, although I doubt it. Maybe she will become average. Or, maybe she will drop down below average once she hits harder material, and start struggling because of undiagnosed learning disabilities. I fully believe that any of the above are possible, and I worry about the last case the most.

 

If you don't view giftedness as a yes or no thing, and you think your child could "become" either gifted or average... then....

 

What do you think giftedness IS?

 

This is a great website, BTW.

www.hoagiesgifted.org and http://www.hoagiesgifted.org/gifted_101.htm

 

Here's a great analogy: http://www.stephanietolan.com/is_it_a_cheetah.htm

[MamaSheep]

People who are not academically gifted often have a "gift" in some other area--often one that is less measureable or less honored in our society, but is nevertheless just as amazing and valuable. My ds learned to talk early, picked up reading entirely by himeself at age 3 (except for being read to and playing a little with fridge magnets), and amused himself by doing things like memorizing the names of all the bones in the human skeleton at age 4. My dd has always been a little laggy on things like that--average, or even a little slower. BUT she has the most amazing sense of people and how to make them feel good about themselves, and motivate them, and make them feel welcome, wanted, and loved. She seriously blows away even professional counselors at this and she's only seven. It really is astounding to watch her at work, and it's something that comes just as naturally to her as reading did to ds. It's not something you can find out about on an IQ test, or an achievement test, or by testing her reading ability, but it is a very real gift and frankly, I'm envious. She "reads" people like ds reads books. I think sometimes we get so caught up in looking for one type of "giftedness" (especially the kinds that get all the attention and accolades) that we completely miss or degrade other kinds of gifts that matter just as much. In other endeavors where I have worked with children I have been finding it much more useful to ask myself "what is this child's gift" rather than "is this child gifted". So my advice is to be careful not to denegrate your dd's gifts just because they differ from your own and don't fall within the categories laid out on a website geared toward a specific type of gift.

[zaichiki]

The thing is that although children, themselves, *are* gifts and all people/children have strengths, and some are amazing...

 

the *term* gifted has a definition. Maybe our language has chosen the wrong word, and people will give it different meanings or whatever, but it IS definable. There *is* something being defined when a child is found to have an IQ of 180 or 200 or 50. Of COURSE this is not defining the child's VALUE or whether or not they have strengths or abilities in other areas.

 

I agree with MamaSheep who wrote about asking oneself "what is this child's gift" rather than "is this child gifted." We should not be looking to define a child by just any one aspect of what they can/cannot do.

 

Nonetheless, there *is* something called giftedness. (I dislike the word, too... maybe we should call it high-IQ-ed-ness or something instead. Then there would be no confusion or offense. It could be like saying a person has red hair or is tall for his age.)

[MissKNG]

Another check on the Hoagies site:

 

http://www.hoagiesgifted.org/underserved.htm

 

About half way down the article, there's a chart for how often you will find a gifted individual...

 

example: Moderately gifted (IQ 130-144) is 1:44 - 1:1,00 persons or mildly/basic giftedness is 1:6 - 1:44 persons.

 

 

 

 

[Nan in Mass]

..."feed kid's head" LOL...

That's all I'm trying to do, also. None of mine are profoundly enough gifted in academics that I have to worry about the whole gifted part. Feeding that head is a problem, though. Asta, would you be willing to read my wail and comment? I know it is hard if you don't know the child personally, but...

[Storm Bay]

You can't tell by 20 months, and not all gifted kids race through--some are very deep thinkers. My eldest was quick early on and is still gifted, but she shows that more in her deep thinking than in her school output. At 7 or 8 she was still far ahead, but she doesn't care about school.

 

The biggest surprise for my was in discovering that my ds is gifted. He was behind in everything at 20 months. He has low muscle tone, poor vision (which we didn't realize then) and is developing in an atypical pattern, which is evidently normal for him. He'd caught up in everything except speech by 2, and in speech by 2.5. However, when he was 4 his giftedness began to show with his deep, penetrating questions far, far beyond his years and in other areas. Actually, he had some signs before, but it was hard to see them. He thinks far beyond his ability to communicate even now, and he's 9, but his ability to communicate is gradually catching up to his thinking. This isn't something one can readily test for, but a friend of mine who is a teacher figured out he was gifted almost before I did.

 

No one is gifted in absolutely everything, but you can't test everything, either. Some gifted dc bloom late (eg Einstein & Edison) and some early (eg Fessenden, the real inventor of the radio & of many other things--he was obviously brilliant from an early age). My uncle is a genius, but learned to read in school.

[HeidiD]

I agree with MamaSheep who wrote about asking oneself "what is this child's gift" rather than "is this child gifted." We should not be looking to define a child by just any one aspect of what they can/cannot do.

 

Nonetheless, there *is* something called giftedness. (I dislike the word, too... maybe we should call it high-IQ-ed-ness or something instead. Then there would be no confusion or offense. It could be like saying a person has red hair or is tall for his age.)

 

I also concur with MamaSheep. And like you, also dislike the word "gifted" used to describe high IQ - it's too general and implies an overall superiority to those who lack this particular trait. And this characteristic doesn't necessarily guarantee worldly success or human decency (there have been plenty of evil geniuses in history). In our family, we have a mix of gifts - some extremely high IQ's, some more ordinary in that regard but gifted in art, athletics, etc. And one child with LD's who has struggles in all areas, but is kind, caring and sensitive toward others (IMO a far greater gift than a big IQ number). I like Howard Gardner's view of multiple intelligences - it fosters appreciation for abilities besides IQ and puts them on an equal plane.

[Kuovonne]

If you don't view giftedness as a yes or no thing, and you think your child could "become" either gifted or average... then....

 

What do you think giftedness IS?

 

This is a great website, BTW.

www.hoagiesgifted.org and http://www.hoagiesgifted.org/gifted_101.htm

 

Here's a great analogy: http://www.stephanietolan.com/is_it_a_cheetah.htm

 

I think that being gifted means being extraordinary in some way (academic or otherwise) whether or not we recognize or can measure it. I don't think that people are born either gifted or not.

 

I've looked over the hoagies site a few times. That web site is part of why I'm sure that my children are *not* gifted. My kids just don't exhibit those types of symptoms. (I hang out on this board based on the "accelerated" part, not because of potential future giftedness.)

 

I like the cheetah analogy when it comes to helping gifted children who aren't recognized as such. There are clearly underserved gifted children around. However, I don't think being gifted is limited to being genetic in origin, unlike being a cheetah, and thus I believe that giftednes can develop later in life. Why can't a child who isn't gifted, but has potential, become gifted later in life?

[HeidiD]

The biggest surprise for my was in discovering that my ds is gifted. He was behind in everything at 20 months. He has low muscle tone, poor vision (which we didn't realize then) and is developing in an atypical pattern, which is evidently normal for him.

 

One of my kids is just like yours. I've been surprised by how he has turned out (he's 14 now), because I really wasn't tracking him - I just noticed he was doing a lot of reading. And this was after he was late to walk and late to talk. And so different from the other "gifted" kids in the family - they were hyper-intense from birth, highly active and intellectually insatiable from an early age. What they have in common with him is that they were somehow able to leap years ahead of the typical academic subjects with little or no instruction. It's become a family joke - it almost seems like they just have to wave their hand over the book or assignment or whatever and absorb it magically. This is good and bad - I want to make sure they don't go through life thinking everything is so easy, because no one should rely solely on their intellect rather than learn how to work hard.

 

I really don't think there is any way to tell in advance if a kid is like this. Each one is unique.

[fourgrogs]

It seems that if you homeschool, it is not needed to get a child tested until later. But, if you want a child to skip Kinder. you have to test them at age five.

 

We waited until age 7:11 to test because we were waiting for the "leveling out" of third grade (as the saying goes.) Our child is adopted, so we counldn't rely on our genetics to predict how his brain works.

 

I've read that IQ/Achievement testing is more accurate at ages 8 or so. It can be artificially high in the younger years.

[EthiopianFood]

My guess is that, if they came up with a new term, that term would eventually be seen in a negative light as well. It's the core belief that saying someone is smart means you think they are better than someone who isn't that needs to be changed.

 

Thanks for your replies everyone. I'll put it on the shelf for awhile, and reevaluate in the future. I felt guilty for awhile because I hoped she would be gifted academically. Then I realized that this wasn't any different than someone who plays sports hoping they can share that love with their children. Academics was my sport. If it doesn't happen, I'll be a little sad, but oh well. :) I'm just focusing on all the qualities she DOES possess (and I really did get a good kid :D ), and I'm sure the whole thing will fade with time. I'm a fiercely loyal mama, so I'm sure I'll be convinced I have the best child ever no matter what! :lol:

[LittleIzumi]

One of my kids is just like yours. I've been surprised by how he has turned out (he's 14 now), because I really wasn't tracking him - I just noticed he was doing a lot of reading. And this was after he was late to walk and late to talk. And so different from the other "gifted" kids in the family - they were hyper-intense from birth, highly active and intellectually insatiable from an early age. What they have in common with him is that they were somehow able to leap years ahead of the typical academic subjects with little or no instruction. It's become a family joke - it almost seems like they just have to wave their hand over the book or assignment or whatever and absorb it magically. This is good and bad - I want to make sure they don't go through life thinking everything is so easy, because no one should rely solely on their intellect rather than learn how to work hard.

 

 

Totally. I still have no idea how to study :confused: and I could have used that skill in a few college classes....

 

I also have a dd who is developmentally/speech delayed, and barely talking at 2. But she signs hundreds of words, and with the Signing Time ABCs she learned the entire printed alphabet, upper and lower, in two weeks, and can (as best as she physically can right now) say and sign them all as well. So you never can tell, lol.

[Storm Bay]

I also concur with MamaSheep. And like you, also dislike the word "gifted" used to describe high IQ - it's too general and implies an overall superiority to those who lack this particular trait. And this characteristic doesn't necessarily guarantee worldly success or human decency (there have been plenty of evil geniuses in history). In our family, we have a mix of gifts - some extremely high IQ's, some more ordinary in that regard but gifted in art, athletics, etc. And one child with LD's who has struggles in all areas, but is kind, caring and sensitive toward others (IMO a far greater gift than a big IQ number). I like Howard Gardner's view of multiple intelligences - it fosters appreciation for abilities besides IQ and puts them on an equal plane.

:iagree: with most of this. One of the reasons I quit bothering to try in school, but not the only one, is because I was tired of being told how gifted I was and I was afraid of not being perfect. The label and testing became an onus--plus, I wanted friends more than academic success(but then, I wasn't cut out for ps, either.) Also, some people truly are gifted in nonacademic areas. I don't think that everyone is gifted in something, or the term gifted loses its meaning, but I do think that barring some physiological issue (whether by birth or from injury) everyone is intelligent in something. I don't for a moment think that being gifted means being better.

 

What you do with what talents/intelligence you have is ultimately the most important thing. There have been some very evil people in the world who were undoubtedly also highly and even profoundly gifted. Also, for just one example, I think that those who are profoundly gifted who lack the ability to converse with most people are obviously not gifted in every area because the ability to converse with people and get to their hearts/needs is its own area of intelligence, even if you have different interests.

[Nan in Mass]

By the time you figure out that she isn't academically gifted (if she isn't), she will have developed lots of other things to love, and you will have developped lots of other interests to share together. I've developped some interests in the last few years that overlapped with my mother and suddenly we are very close. Not that we didn't have a very loving relationship to begin with, especially after I had children, but we didn't share hobbies.

[Nan in Mass]

Mine didn't talk until they were two, and they each developed their own sign language. It faded away when they began to be able to talk well.

[Donna]

The way I heard it, it was the former (bolded). And that only "gifted" kids kept going/took off, what ever someone wanted to call it.

 

I hate all of the terminology. I try and feed kid's head. It seems to eat a lot, LOL.

 

In our state, there has been a lot of discussion about this lately due to the amount of money being sunk into preschools for certain school districts. Studies have shown that those kids who are in the preschools receiving instruction at 3yo and 4yo do begin school with some advantage over their age peers not in the preschools but by 3rd grade the advantage is no longer evident.

[SheWillFly]

I don't think at 20 months anyone needs to even wonder about it. Enjoy their little moments at whatever speed they come.

[MamaSheep]

My guess is that, if they came up with a new term, that term would eventually be seen in a negative light as well. It's the core belief that saying someone is smart means you think they are better than someone who isn't that needs to be changed.

 

Thanks for your replies everyone. I'll put it on the shelf for awhile, and reevaluate in the future. I felt guilty for awhile because I hoped she would be gifted academically. Then I realized that this wasn't any different than someone who plays sports hoping they can share that love with their children. Academics was my sport. If it doesn't happen, I'll be a little sad, but oh well. :) I'm just focusing on all the qualities she DOES possess (and I really did get a good kid :D ), and I'm sure the whole thing will fade with time. I'm a fiercely loyal mama, so I'm sure I'll be convinced I have the best child ever no matter what! :lol:

 

I can totally relate to that. I'm an artsy type person with an art degree and was very much looking forward to coloring and cutting and taping and whatnot with my kids. My son NEVER liked to color. Not even scribble. Scissors are annoying and tape and glue are anathema. He is so VERY not artsy. But we connect over science and he enjoys philosophical discussions, as do I. My daughter is very enthusiastic about crafty stuff, though, so I just push my artsy urges in her direction. It all shakes out in the end. :) I agree with whoever said 20 months is still way young to worry about it much. Their basic personality does come through pretty well then, but there is still a LOT of time ahead in which new interests and talents will emerge.

[Karenciavo]

I agree with momto7 and others, it's hard to know at 20 months. My oldest starting talking at 9 months, by 20 months he was known as the Little Professor because of his vast knowledge and vocabulary. He's still gifted in speaking. My youngest only said a few words till 16 months, didn't even walk on his own till 14 months, I was worried about him. Then he taught himself to read at age 3 and is ripping through both Horizons and Singapore Maths and I don't worry anymore. Relax, enjoy your child.

[Karenciavo]

Oops, I missed your reply. I understand, you're right. Enjoy! I miss that age.

 

My guess is that, if they came up with a new term, that term would eventually be seen in a negative light as well. It's the core belief that saying someone is smart means you think they are better than someone who isn't that needs to be changed.

 

Thanks for your replies everyone. I'll put it on the shelf for awhile, and reevaluate in the future. I felt guilty for awhile because I hoped she would be gifted academically. Then I realized that this wasn't any different than someone who plays sports hoping they can share that love with their children. Academics was my sport. If it doesn't happen, I'll be a little sad, but oh well. :) I'm just focusing on all the qualities she DOES possess (and I really did get a good kid :D ), and I'm sure the whole thing will fade with time. I'm a fiercely loyal mama, so I'm sure I'll be convinced I have the best child ever no matter what! :lol:

[mchel210]

I agree...I didnt worry if my kids had been gifted at 20 months. I gave them tons of "brain games" though. :) We did several puzzles a day, tons of read alouds, lots of figure out the answer games, board games...etc. THe list goes on and on. Now...do my kids vary in traits? Yes. My 2 girls both had been crawling by 3 months, speaking full sentences by a year, talking non stop...and one has so many weird little quirks that seem to be traits of high IQ kids...but my son didnt walk till 12 months, couldnt read till 2nd grade, and was a typical baby boy! He did everything by the book for developmental stages. I see the differences in them when I look back...but either way...I would still do tons of games and puzzles. Just have fun. 20 months is a lot of fun!!!

[Irene Lynn]

Ahhhh, so you are equating giftedness with achievement? I can see where you could get that meaning from a dictionary or such, but most of the time when that term is used here, it has a more clinical definition that does not refer to achievement, though high achievement is often attached. My dd is "gifted". She thinks and processes differently. I know her personality and I don't really expect any great achievement in life. She probably could, but so far she doesn't really like to work hard and she has such perfectionism that it will hold her back. Many people who process far more "normally" will probably achieve more in life than she does, though she is a wonderful person with lots of compassion, who will positively impact those close to her. I don't see her "giftedness" as making her better or anything like that, but I do teach her differently. My sister is undoubtedly "gifted". She was validictorion of her class and has gone on to have low paying jobs that only use a tiny bit of her brain. She has no motivation to do anything, but that has not changed how her mind works. She can still pick things up very easily, when she tries, and can jump ahead in a conversation or ask why about unusual things. Her mind is still processing things in the same way, but you can't achieve anything if you don't DO anything. LOL

 

Let me compare "gifted" with "depressed". My dad always saw depressed as being sad and down about something. He never thought he was depressed because he was not down about anything in particular. His view of the word was more of an emotional definition. His doctor prescribed an antidepressant, much to my father's confusion, supposedly to help my father with pain control. (Smart doctor! LOL) I cannot tell you how grateful I am. My father is soooo much easier to be around. There is a clinical definition of depression that antidepression medications can help. My dad had many of the clinical symptoms, but he did not know that depression could mean more than feeling sad about something. If you look in a dictionary, you might only see the definition talking about sadness, but that is not the whole picture, nor the only meaning.

 

The word "gifted" can be used in more than one way, but I think that most people on a board like this tend to use the clinical definition of gifted, since that affects how we teach or what materials might be most helpful. Because I tend to think of giftedness in the clinical sense, I don't see any potential for giftedness to come and go, unless there is a head injury of something like that. If I were talking about achievement, then I totally agree that achievement can come and go, but whether my child achieves (what I perceive as your definition of gifted) or not she will still be the same person with the same manner of processing information (what I mean, when I use the term gifted).

[zaichiki]

Why can't a child who isn't gifted, but has potential, become gifted later in life?

 

Kuovonne,

I like Irene Lynn's response to explain what giftedness is all about. I also think you may be thinking of achievement...

 

Anyway, there are people whose brains are simply made differently. They think and learn differently than most of the population. The word our culture uses for this is gifted.

 

Here's an example: my oldest basically taught himself to read. He's a gestalt learner. He can't learn things very well when they are broken down into small, sequential parts. He'll try to memorize them in order, but he will struggle and struggle and just not understand it at ALL. When he sees the whole picture, he can easily suck the meaning out of it. He couldn't learn the phonics rules when they were given to him (really! it was like a foreign language to him), but when he watched me read him a book aloud, he just understood that the e tacked onto the end of those words changed the vowel sound the same way in all the words. Then, later when I tried to "teach" him about silent e, he interrupted me and explained it to me.

 

Ds learned to read music the same way. He plays the cello and reads bass clef. When the teachers played jumping games with the class, jumping from line to space on a giant staff on the floor... or having the kids recite the notes in order... or all the other fun games that broke learning to read note names down into smaller, sequential parts for the young kids, he was TOTALLY LOST. Instead, one afternoon he looked at a piece of sheet music for a song he could already play, while he was playing it. He looked at each note on the page as he played it... and could "magically" read all the notes on the staff that afternoon. He could even recognize and play notes that weren't in that piece of sheet music because he had figured out the pattern (one letter note higher for each space/line higher in the staff... and two would be a skip, etc.). BUT... try to EXPLAIN the pattern to him, or try to have him recite the notes in order, while pointing to the lines and spaces before he figured it out on his own AND HE WAS TOTALLY LOST.

 

These two examples show how his brain learns differently. It's not about what he learned when (achievement), but HOW he learned it. These examples also show how quickly he was able to figure out the patterns without guidance.

 

It's not *bad* when kids need more instruction or repetition to learn things. It's normal. It's typical. And ALL kids learn at different speeds: some more quickly than others. Some kids will achieve more than others, across the board. This is not giftedness. Giftedness is a different animal, though many who are gifted will achieve and be successful with the proper support. Most require a *different* kind of support than typical kids.

 

Hi. I'm Kate. My kid's a cheetah. I don't always know how or when to get more room for my cheetah to run. Sometimes I have trouble finding the right type of prey. (Sometimes I even PUT him in that cage.) Every once in a while I want to stop and appreciate how fast those cheetahs can run: it's really amazing to watch. I'm glad there's a place I can come to talk about cheetahs. :)

[Kuovonne]

Kuovonne,

I like Irene Lynn's response to explain what giftedness is all about. I also think you may be thinking of achievement...

...

Anyway, there are people whose brains are simply made differently. They think and learn differently than most of the population. The word our culture uses for this is gifted.

 

I'm not thinking of achievement. I'm not talking about children who *are* gifted, even if they don't achieve. I'm talking about children who *aren't* gifted because they think in a normal way. They aren't extraordinary in that way.

 

I'm also not talking about giftedness coming and going. I'm talking about becoming gifted at different ages, and staying gifted.

 

I agree that being gifted has a lot to do with how the brain works. I also think that the brain takes many years to fully develop, and I believe that how much and the way in which the brain develops is not strictly genetic. Therefore, I believe that a young child can have a "normal" brain, yet her brain might continue to grow and develop into a "gifted" brain later in life. I believe that a child's brain might cross the threshold into giftedness as a baby, as a toddler, as a school age child, or never. I believe the chance of crossing that threshold decrease as the child gets older, because brain growth slows down. However, I don't want to put a specific age limit on it.

 

I agree that some people's brains work differently. I also believe that they can be different in different ways. I happen to believe in the left brain / right brain theory. To me, your son is gifted because his right brain has an amazing processing power. Bravo to you (and the other parents of gifted children) for recognizing his giftedness and working with him. I'm not trying to take anything away from you.

 

My daughter isn't gifted. She shares some traits with gifted kids, but she simply doesn't make the astounding mental leaps that gifted children do. She doesn't need different instruction from normal kids. I just happen to give her different instruction because I'm lazy. If she becomes gifted, it will be in a left-brain sort of way, and will look totally different from your son's profile.

 

It feels like you are saying that either (1) my daughter will never be gifted and I'm a fool for thinking that she ever might be, or (2) she is gifted, and I'm putting her in a cage which will prevent her from becoming her true self.

 

BTW, I'm okay with the fact that my child isn't gifted. I'm okay if she is never gifted. Having a normal child makes life much easier.

 

I'm glad that that you and other parents of gifted children have this forum to speak freely about your children. However, the heading of this forum indicates that it is also for parents of children who are merely accelerated. I hope that as a parent of a child who is merely accelerated, I can also speak freely.

 

Also, least I be admonished for talking about gifted children without having one, (1) this thread was started by someone wondering about a child not being gifted, and (2) I do have gifted relatives and was briefly in a gifted program as a child.

Edited September 23, 2009 by Kuovonne

[zaichiki]

Kuovonne,

 

Jumping off from the OP's post:

 

But how do you know that your child (and you perhaps) are NOT gifted?

 

There are different levels of giftedness. A PG child does not "look like" an MG child.

 

I agree with you about the left brain/right brain thing. I usually refer to it as learning styles. My son is a very strong visual learner (he also has severe relative sequencing weaknesses, as backed up by the subscores in that area when he was tested), but my dd is a very strong auditory learner. She learns best sequentially, and in small parts, even though she has been labeled as gifted (according to tests), just like ds. She also has dyslexia, though, and if I didn't have "proof" that she is gifted, there would have been many times in her life when I would have severely doubted those other times when I was "sure" she was such a quick learner.

 

I have *no* idea how the brain works. Really. I've read up on the subject quite a bit -- usually from the education point of view. But, honestly, there are SO many influences on brain development.

 

I don't think, though, that someone who is gifted can become typical. I also don't think a child with an IQ of 100 can become a child with an IQ of 160, no matter WHAT the environment is.

 

(I bet IQ scores can be affected by the environment... but I can't imagine a situation where that could happen by more than a small amount. I wonder if any studies have been done on this?)

 

However, I do know that depending on the day, the tester, and the kid, IQ scores can be *under*estimates... a test is just a test, afterall, and it is limited as to what it can tell us about our children.

 

BTW :) I'm certainly NOT intending to tell you that your child is not gifted. I don't even KNOW your child. I also don't mean to tell you that you're putting her in a "cage." The "cage" comment was directly related to me sometimes underestimating my child and unintentionally limiting him due to my assumptions that certain things need to be learned certain ways.

[Storm Bay]

Kuovonne,

 

I don't think, though, that someone who is gifted can become typical. I also don't think a child with an IQ of 100 can become a child with an IQ of 160, no matter WHAT the environment is.

 

(I bet IQ scores can be affected by the environment... but I can't imagine a situation where that could happen by more than a small amount. I wonder if any studies have been done on this?)

.

 

 

I remember a study done where there was a significant leap in an IQ test. However, it given to a group of dc in an entirely different culture. After playing with some selected toys they jumped about 20 points. However, there was no change in their innate intelligence, simply in their exposure to toys that would help them perform in certain areas of the test. It's been a good 20 odd years since I read this, so the details are fuzzy since I didn't keep it, but I do remember that the jump was surprisingly large.

 

IQ is a measurement that can be helpful, but can't measure every type of giftedness, and usually isn't a hard and fast indicator of certain types of giftedness that appear later (such as in philosophy.) One can test moderately or highly gifted, yet end up being beyond that in an area such as philosophy. How about in teaching? I have an adopted db who is clearly highly gifted in teaching at the post secondary level, but certainly isn't higly gifted academically that I'm aware of, and never made the honour roll until the fifth year of his honours B. Sc. He's rather modest, so I have to learn it from others, but he's the kind of teacher who turns people onto science for the first time (not just once or twice, either, but often--students have made entire career choices after taking a class or two with him specifically, and his ratings are almost always excellent in student ratings, so it's not just the age of the students), makes things understandable, etc. I think that a teacher of that calibre is truly gifted in teaching, even if they aren't considered gifted academically. The same would go for performance arts, etc.

Edited September 23, 2009 by Karin

[zaichiki]

I remember a study done where there was a significant leap in an IQ test. However, it given to a group of dc in an entirely different culture. After playing with some selected toys they jumped about 20 points.

 

Well, that makes sense! I can imagine that the IQ tests we use here in the states (and in most Western countries, I'd imagine) would certainly underestimate children from very different cultures. Aren't most tests (standardized, especially) tied strongly to certain cultural experiences?

[zaichiki]

IQ is a measurement that can be helpful, but can't measure every type of giftedness, and usually isn't a hard and fast indicator of certain types of giftedness that appear later (such as in philosophy.)

 

I don't think you can rule out giftedness based on lack of certain achievement, either, though. Like others have posted on this forum: there are other influences that determine our achievement. For most of us, it's probably strongly tied to how hard we work (motivation, interest, time spent on the skill). Perhaps the types of giftedness that appear later that you mentioned are achievement related, and not IQ related? (Don't know, though. I know nearly NOTHING about philosophy.)

 

Teaching, though, I know. (I used to be a teacher in my former life.) Teaching skills can be learned, if a person is interested. By just about anyone. No intelligence pre-req there. I've seen some great teachers, but I've also known some absolute geniuses that couldn't teach for beans. (They made few attempts to change that, even though they were offered inservice, workshops, mentorships, books, etc. They just weren't interested.) A GREAT book that illustrates this is Liping Ma's book: Knowing and Teaching Elementary Mathematics. I love that book!

[Storm Bay]

Well, that makes sense! I can imagine that the IQ tests we use here in the states (and in most Western countries, I'd imagine) would certainly underestimate children from very different cultures. Aren't most tests (standardized, especially) tied strongly to certain cultural experiences?

 

 

That's my understanding of them. I really haven't spent that much time on it since dd was in K (she's 14 now.) I have mixed feelings about the tests. On the one hand, they can be helpful for some, particularly if it helps dc get into programs where they are required. On the other hand, they are limited. When my dd had a couple of tests done, she flabbergasted the tester with the open, flexible test, but she was up and down on the rigid test. If she thought a question was stupid or boring, she couldn't be bothered to answer it. Her scholastic output certainly doesn't equal the way she tested, but she's only 14, so that could change when she's older, and she appears to be moving that way (but I'm not holding my breath.) Of course, mine didn't equal how I tested, either, because I was bored, developed reverse perfectionism and various other factors. But I didn't become stupider; I simply turned my interests elsewhere.

[Kuovonne]

But how do you know that your child (and you perhaps) are NOT gifted?

 

I know that my child isn't gifted because I've read up on the subject of giftedness in young children, and I've observed her. She hasn't been tested. She doesn't show enough of the traits to be gifted, profoundly, moderately, or otherwise. She is accelerated because I taught her to read early; unlike gifted kids who are early readers, she didn't teach herself. I keep observing her, because if she does start to make mental leaps, I want to be able to adapt to that. She is also only six years old.

 

I don't know if I'm gifted or not. I was in a gifted program briefly, because at one time I tested high enough to be placed in the program. I suspect that it was just a one-time fluke in the test. At this point in my life it doesn't matter if I'm gifted or not because it wouldn't impact my life at all - I'm a very happy unemployed bum.

 

I have *no* idea how the brain works.

I don't either. But I do know that it grows and develops over time, and that environment does have an impact.

 

I don't think, though, that someone who is gifted can become typical. I also don't think a child with an IQ of 100 can become a child with an IQ of 160, no matter WHAT the environment is.

 

I agree with you on both accounts. A gifted person doesn't suddenly become not gifted. A person's IQ also does not jump sixty points. However, the difference between "normal" and "gifted" is not sixty points.

 

Let's set aside for the moment that IQ and giftedness are different (but related) things, and that tests aren't always accurate. An IQ of 115 is slightly above average, but still within the realm of "normal/not gifted." An IQ of 130 is moderately gifted. That's a difference of only 15 points. I think that the IQ of a bright, non-gifted child with a growing brain and supportive environment can increase 15 points.

 

BTW :) I'm certainly NOT intending to tell you that your child is not gifted. I don't even KNOW your child. I also don't mean to tell you that you're putting her in a "cage."

 

Okay, but it does feel like you were saying that it had to be one or the other.

[zaichiki]

This is the REAL stumper, I think:

 

Let's set aside for the moment that IQ and giftedness are different (but related) things, and that tests aren't always accurate. An IQ of 115 is slightly above average, but still within the realm of "normal/not gifted." An IQ of 130 is moderately gifted. That's a difference of only 15 points. I think that the IQ of a bright, non-gifted child with a growing brain and supportive environment can increase 15 points.

 

 

What *is* the difference between a child with above average intelligence (say about 115) and a moderately gifted child (say about 130)? I think the answer is "who knows!" Seriously. When you're talking about two scores that are so close, and then adding/subtracting environmental influences, I suspect that there isn't much difference. But schools, classes, programs, and definitions have to draw a line *some*where.

 

Similar questions have been raised by those talking about the Davidsons' Young Scholars Program: is there much difference between a moderately gifted child and a highly gifted child? Not always: but sometimes YES! It's a continuum.

 

Have you checked out Ruf's Levels of Giftedness? She's got a checklist of sorts/description of traits that does NOT rely on IQ test scores. There are some interesting milestone descriptions at about the halfway point.

Here's a link: http://www.pagiftededucation.info/documents/RufEstimatesofLevelsofGiftedness.pdf

 

BTW, I taught my dd to read, too, though she picked up on the basic letter sounds and blending on her own. She is "labeled" as gifted. She also has dyslexia. A child can be *taught* to read (rather than learning on their own) and still be gifted. (Not trying to convince you that your child is or isn't gifted.)

[Kuovonne]

What *is* the difference between a child with above average intelligence (say about 115) and a moderately gifted child (say about 130)? I think the answer is "who knows!" Seriously. When you're talking about two scores that are so close, and then adding/subtracting environmental influences, I suspect that there isn't much difference. But schools, classes, programs, and definitions have to draw a line *some*where.

 

 

Even if there isn't much difference between a bright child and a moderately gifted, one is still gifted, and the other isn't. And I believe that as a bright child grows, he might get a mental growth spurt that bridges that gap.

 

Have you checked out Ruf's Levels of Giftedness? She's got a checklist of sorts/description of traits that does NOT rely on IQ test scores.

 

Yes, I looked over her levels of giftedness earlier when another poster on this list mentioned it. Her list of traits/attainments are part of why I think that my daughter isn't gifted.

 

Here's a quote from the paper you linked to:

There is overlap in each of the levels, and inner qualities – qualities that can sometimes change over time due to environmental circumstances – are often the factors that make the difference among several Levels.

 

 

Since factors that can change over time can make the difference between levels of giftedness, why can't those same factors make the difference betwen not gifted and gifted over time?

 

A child can be *taught* to read (rather than learning on their own) and still be gifted. (Not trying to convince you that your child is or isn't gifted.)

And some gifted kids don't learn to read until much later than normal. I was trying to answer your question of how I know my daughter isn't gifted. Early reading is the main trait that my daughter shares with gifted children. However, given that she had to be taught to read, I believe that she doesn't have enough other gifted traits to be considered gifted.

 

Anyway, I think that my participation in this discussion no longer has value for the other members of this forum. If you would like to continue this discussion offline, please pm me.

[zaichiki]

I'm sorry if I've replied too much... and I truly hope you haven't felt that I am arguing with you. I've had a little too much time on my hands today and the thread interests me. Self-control... sigh!

[Renai]

 

Anyway, I think that my participation in this discussion no longer has value for the other members of this forum. If you would like to continue this discussion offline, please pm me.

 

I'm actually enjoying the conversation. Just because everyone doesn't jump in (I'm a case in point), doesn't mean it is without value :D. I hope ya'll continue it online. :lurk5:

[Quad Shot Academy]

She is only 20 months, but it seems that if a child is gifted, there would already be signs of this.

 

At what age can you safely stop wondering if it will "show up" somehow?

 

My gifted son was very motor and speech delayed. We were told from birth that he likely had brain damage; he was in OT and speech therapy for many, many years. At about age 3.5, people started telling me how bright he was and started calling him a genius. I thought they were nuts or at least joking! In K, when he was only 1 grade level ahead, I kept telling people that we were just very disciplined in our school work and he was accelerated, not gifted. I did not realize how bright he was until he read two encyclopedia sets in first grade and begged me to buy another set! That is when I finally started realizing that I should get off the special needs board and onto the gifted one! :001_huh: He has met most of the level 4 traits on the Ruf list and is numerous grade levels ahead (3.5 according to his last placement test, which I struggle to believe.)

 

My daughter has met as many traits as him and more because she was not speech or motor delayed. At age 3, she told me that she was going to read me a book, I giggled and got down the BOB book set and she read me the first four books, w/o a problem. (My son could sound anything out at 3, but couldn't comprehend what he was saying until 4.5.) She, on the other hand, is completely academically average now. That could be a topic of a whole other thread though. :lol:

 

Basically, what I am saying is that if people are telling you that she is bright, she probably is, but even if she is, she may not become academically accelerated. You shouldn't discount the fact that she might be gifted! Did you check out the Ruf list? I wish I had known about that way back when, because I thought all babies loved books from birth and I thought all kids learned their letters by 2, if taught.

Edited September 24, 2009 by Quad Shot Academy
wrote a wrong number

[Storm Bay]

I know that my child isn't gifted because I've read up on the subject of giftedness in young children, and I've observed her. She hasn't been tested. She doesn't show enough of the traits to be gifted, profoundly, moderately, or otherwise..

 

 

One more time--not ALL gifted dc show traits at your dd's age. More than one parent has been surprised to learn that their second, obviously average and not gifted dc was gifted (often through testing.) That's not to say she is gifted, but outward signs are not always there, particularly that young, as many of us have been sharing about our own dc. I even have a highly gifted cousin, who is one of the tops in his field internationally who couldn't speak until he was 4 (and he's always been well-adjusted socially, so it wasn't autism.)

[Nan in Mass]

I would have been suspicious right there. The only person I know who started talking later than my first son (2) is our friend who tested genius level. He didn't talk until he was 3 or 4 (can't remember which).

[zaichiki]

I thought all babies loved books from birth and I thought all kids learned their letters by 2, if taught.

 

I *still* believe this. My gut tells me that it's the environment... I want to believe this. It seems so "normal" to me for babies to love books and kids to know their letters when they're 2 (or so). It's true of all of my kids and just about all the kids in my large extended family.

 

Gifted denial? Anyone heard that term before?

 

I struggled with that big time! Before my kids were tested... when I was chatting with other homeschooling moms whose kids were labeled "gifted"... I kept telling them that I fully expected my kids' scores on the upcoming tests to be closer to typical. They really *couldn't* be gifted! (I had all sorts of "proof." I was convinced.) After the tests those moms laughed at me: THEY weren't shocked. I was. It still doesn't feel real: after all, they're just *my* kids and they're really just normal (for them).

 

Now that one of mine is in school, I still have moments when I think he's really just normal... but WHY on EARTH are the OTHER kids so far behind??? Then I just :rolleyes: at myself.

[Janet in Toronto]

My brother was very speech delayed. He wasn't really talking at all by age three and still very little at age four. My parents took him for testing, expecting to be told that he was delayed, only to find out that he was extremely bright. He (now) has a PhD in Religion, is a moral theologian, tenured at a major Canadian university, and has more than made up for the years of little talking! Neither my sister nor I talked much until we were three, we were both identified as gifted in school, and both attained post-graduate degrees as well. My sister and I were both reading before we entered school. My brother was slower to read. Now, he reads and writes extensively as part of his work. My sister and I are more the lay-on-the-sofa-with-a-stack-of-novels types.

 

Just to underscore that it is easier to determine that a child IS likely gifted at a young age than to determine that s/he ISN'T gifted. None of us looked at all gifted at 20 months!

[zaichiki]

Just to underscore that it is easier to determine that a child IS likely gifted at a young age than to determine that s/he ISN'T gifted.

 

That's it! You've hit the nail on the head. There's the idea we've all been trying to communicate -- short and sweet. :)