looking for info/studies on gifted vs. "average"

[Aoife]

Nature vs. nurture has been an ongoing discussion or debate in our home. DH is in the frame of mind that you make a child gifted he/she is not born so. We love to debate here and we love studies! I figured this would be the place to ask about the existence of any study that has compared gifted vs. average children in early childhood. For instance if someone had ever taken two groups of children. One who they worked with an engaged in early learning experience and another group of children that were only played with in a non-educational sort of way. Think pure toys, TV, video games and such vs. people like us that sing the ABCs, watch only videos that have some educational value and work with our children.

 

It is my belief that there are "gifted" children that excel more due to a mix of genetic predisposition, good prenatal care and other factors that affect a child's physical capabilities. For instance not all 16 month old boys can pickup and overhand a ball in pinpoint accuracy or make a basket in a hoop over 90% of the time. Just as not all 2 year old children will be able to actually learn the alphabet in terms of recognition of the letters and understanding that they make a sound and mean something.

 

I wonder if the people that do not believe in the true existence of gifted children are those that do not have them. As My brother was extremely gifted mathmatically and I was gifted in a language sense. We were both in gifted/AP classes throughout our school career but I remember many times in our lives that people would say to my parents that it was just because they were teachers and we were not any different then their child(ren) would have been if they had worked with them early.

 

 

Ok done with my rambling :P so if you have happened across any such studies or have any input on the subject I'd love to hear from you!

Edited February 19, 2010 by Aoife

[TracyP]

I don't know if he is right but my doc explained it this way: You are born with the ability to reach a certain level. Whether or not you reach that potential depends on your environment. I think there is no doubt that a gifted child is born gifted. I think someone who is extremely gifted will excel no matter what. However, it seems the environment a child is raised in could definitely make the difference in whether some children ever "live up to" the abilities they were born with.

[LisaDSB]

I agree with both of you. I don't think the environment can create a gifted child, although it might prevent one from meeting his potential.

 

Incidentally, my husband and I are both exceptionally gifted (both members of Mensa, based on our Law School Admissions Tests). I grew up with a highschool dropout, single mother (until she remarried when I was 5), and a father who abandoned me at age 4. By the time I was 16 I had moved 16 times. After my mother remarried, my life was much more stable, but I wouldn't say it was "enriched" in any way.

 

My husband grew up on a farm with hardworking parents who loved him dearly but had no money for books or extras. He was lucky to find the odd Reader's Digest to read at home, although he did read most of the books in the school library, as he always finished his schoolwork early.

 

Our kids, on the other hand, have been blessed with all of the educational offerings imaginable. Our home has been filled with books and educational toys and media since they were babies. They are both exceptionally gifted (and may be smarter than their parents, but it's hard to say for sure -- and that could simply be a function of their parents both being intelligent, versus the environment).

 

It will be interesting to see how they turn out. Of course, I'm hoping for great things from them, but I wonder if they'll be spoilt by all of the attention and resources lavished on them. My husband and I, despite our rather modest upbringings and lack of stimulation, both managed to become successful professionals.

 

My point is that it was neither an abundance nor a lack of resources and attention that resulted in "giftedness". It just was. I think those who would say that you can "create" a gifted child are off base. You can certainly nurture a love of learning in any child, I believe, but there is a difference. It's mostly genes, IMO, but like the PP said, that potential can certainly end up being wasted.

Edited February 19, 2010 by LisaDSB

[LittleIzumi]

Well, think of it the opposite way. Can educators and parents take a child with LDs or a low IQ and just enrich the environment and raise the IQ to normal or high? If people could do that, there would be almost no low IQ kids out there, hopefully! I agree with the idea that you can definitely stay below your potential, but certain people have a higher ceiling and process information differently, period. Plus aren't most kids within 15 IQ points of their parents, who were generally raised much differently from each other?

[Staceyshoe]

 

Hoagie's website has an incredible wealth of articles about giftedness that would relate to your question. What I've surmised from my readings on giftedness is that many children can be taught to achieve certain academic skills early through enrichment; however, those who are not gifted will fall back within the average range over time. (You sometimes hear people erroneously talking about children "outgrowing" their giftedness.) Truly gifted people will continue to excel throughout their lifetime. There are also certain traits that are common among the gifted but not seen often within the general population such as an incredibly long attention span at a very young age.

[LisaDSB]

What I've surmised from my readings on giftedness is that many children can be taught to achieve certain academic skills early through enrichment; however, those who are not gifted will fall back within the average range over time. (You sometimes hear people erroneously talking about children "outgrowing" their giftedness.) Truly gifted people will continue to excel throughout their lifetime.

 

This seems to be a common misconception. When my kids were at Montessori, I often heard people say that Montessori kids started off advanced (because of the enriched environment), but that "it all levels off by grade 3". It's very hard to challenge that line of thinking, as so many people seem to believe it.

[2smartones]

It was explained to me this way: when talking about "gifted and talented", "gifted" is the potential (meaning, you're born with it), and "talented" is the result of upbringing (meaning, you've had opportunities that allowed you to use and perfect your areas of gift). Some people are born with more potential than others, so that classifies them as gifted. In that sense, you're gifted from the moment of conception, and nothing can change that.

[StartingOver]

I don't know of any studies. But I don't believe that gifted children are made. I think they are just born. Of my 4 older children, they all had the same basic beginning with me. Two excelled, two were average. All had high expectations from me, and I feel they lived up to their potential. That potiential was just different.

[Crimson Wife]

In 1996, during the height of the controversy surrounding The Bell Curve, the American Psychological Association commissioned a thorough review of the research on IQ & genetics. Their conclusion was that about 75-80% of the variability in IQ is due to genes.

 

The reference is: Neisser, U., et. al (1996). "Intelligence: Knowns and unknowns." American Psychologist, 51:77-101.

[Guest]

I just finished the book "Outliers," and there was a fantastic comparison of two gifted people, one growing up in a time and place where he had every opportunity to excel, one hitting nothing but obstacles and ending up with a hardscrabble existence while writing, in his free time, books on incredibly demanding and sophisticated topics -- without the benefit of much education. "Outliers" is about how giftedness can be made to appear totally innate --and much of it is -- but is opportunity-dependent for its fulfillment.

 

Another interesting read is Torey Hayden's "One Child," a book about a young girl from the most horrible kind of poverty and parenting you can imagine. When Torey Hayden, a special ed teacher, got this child she was six, and her IQ score on a test Hayden gave her turned out to be a nearly unimaginable 182.

[AngieC]

This seems to be a common misconception. When my kids were at Montessori, I often heard people say that Montessori kids started off advanced (because of the enriched environment), but that "it all levels off by grade 3". It's very hard to challenge that line of thinking, as so many people seem to believe it.

 

Is this a misconception? If a child isn't gifted, then he or she likely will level out. Therefore, unless most of the kids at your children's Montessori school were gifted, then most of them would ultimately level out. (I actually know some people who spent a lot of money on Montessori pre-K & and K classes only to be disappointed that by 3rd grade the other kids had caught up. They were never sure if the money spent was worth it.)

Edited February 20, 2010 by AngieC

[babysparkler]

DH is in the frame of mind that you make a child gifted he/she is not born so.

 

I am proof that this is not always true. My dh was shocked when he overheard a conversation I was having with my Dad years ago, telling him that dh found for me my favorite childhood book (the only one I ever had, given to me by my first grade teacher)... and my Dad responded "You had a book!?!?!" Dh knew I was poor, but didn't realize how bad it was until he heard my Dad say that. My family didn't have the money to even feed us dinner many nights (I'm so thankful for the school lunch program!), so obviously, we didn't have any money for books, toys, etc. I literally had no educational experiences outside of the school. I was tested in first grade and was found to be gifted. There was nothing in my childhood that "made" me gifted, I just was, and I am glad that my teacher noticed.

 

Funny thing is, I am the only one in my family that is "gifted", and I am so different in many other ways too... I always grew up feeling like I was looking in from the outside and understanding so much more than everyone else around me. It wasn't really until I met my husband (who is also gifted) in the middle school that I found someone who was on the same side of the window as me. Our childhoods are as opposite as night and day... and it wasn't "nurture" for me ;)

Edited February 20, 2010 by babysparkler

[babysparkler]

I just finished the book "Outliers,"

 

Dh is currently reading it... I can't wait to get my hands on it when he is finished. From his "tidbits" it sounds very interesting!

[LizzyBee]

I think genetics play an important role in giftedness, but I think environmental factors are also important. There was a study years ago in which teachers were told that certain students were tested and gifted, and certain other students were tested and not so bright. Both groups lived up (or down) to the teachers' expectations. After several weeks, the teachers were told that there was a mix-up and the groups were reversed. The result? Once again, the students lived up to the teachers' expectations. The formerly "gifted" students became "dumb," and the formerly "dumb" students were now "gifted" ~ not just in their teachers' minds, but also in their academic performance, or their teachers' perceptions of their performance.

 

In terms of achievement, motivation is just as important as intelligence. I've known many people with very high IQs who barely passed school because they had no interest and no motivation. I know someone who does the NY Times crossword puzzle in pen, and when someone asked him what he does when he makes a mistake, he replied that he doesn't make mistakes. Same guy took some sort of intelligence test, and the psychologist who administered it said that he was the only person he'd ever given the test to who didn't make any mistakes. Yet, this person has never achieved much of anything in school or life.

 

On the flip side, Ben Carson's mother was illiterate, his parents were divorced, and he had teachers who told him he'd never amount to anything. His mother decided she didn't want her kids doomed to the meager life she was living, so she made them write a book report every week on a book they read after school. She never told them she couldn't read (so they could have written anything and gotten away with it), so they turned off the TV, read books, and wrote book reports. They started doing better in school, and Ben became perhaps the most successful pediatric neurosurgeon ever.

 

We now know that IQ is not a fixed number, yet I think we sometimes place too much importance on it. It's a fluid number that is improved by education, good diet, and mental exercise; and in later years, decreased by the aging process. So when someone takes an IQ test, the result is their score on one day of their entire life, and it may mean very little in a year or ten years. I have a nephew whose IQ score improved by 26 points over a period of several years, and his NP didn't think his score had peaked yet. He is obviously capable of much more than originally thought, and it makes me wonder how much long-term damage was done because his teachers and parents thought his IQ was lower than it really is. Or maybe it's more accurate to say that they thought his intelligence matched his first IQ score, but it did not.

 

 

For instance if someone had ever taken two groups of children. One who they worked with an engaged in early learning experience and another group of children that were only played with in a non-educational sort of way. Think pure toys, TV, video games and such vs. people like us that sing the ABCs, watch only videos that have some educational value and work with our children.

 

A few months ago, I read that intelligence and achievement are on the decline because very young children are spending too much time in structured learning environments such as preschool, and not enough time playing. The point of the study was that our young children need to dream and imagine and create, rather than being rushed from one structured activity to the next or taught to read or add at age 3. Although, as Seinfeld would say, "Not that there's anything wrong with that!" I have one that was reading, adding, subtracting, and begging to do school by age 4, so I get that some kids are ready for that.

 

I'm not someone who thinks that everyone is gifted, but I do think that we in America tend to have a very narrow view of intelligence. I had a client when I lived in Baltimore who was a high school drop-out, and every time I saw him he was wearing boots caked in mud. But his net worth was $35 million. If he'd been forced to finish high school and college, he would have withered and dried up. But give him some dirt and big machines, and he's a happy man, not to mention a self-made millionaire. There's no way he's unintelligent, regardless of the fact that academia makes him shudder.

 

In Upside Down Brilliance, Linda Kreger Silverman says that she noticed that a lot of the kids she tested fit the profile of giftedness, yet they didn't test as gifted. She sorted through these kids tests, trying to find the common denominator. As it turned out, this group of kids all had sequencing weaknesses. Some of them were scary smart even though their IQ score didn't reflect it. Again, not everyone is gifted; but maybe giftedness is more common than we think because our definition is so narrow.

 

I'm sorry my thoughts are so rambling. My personal views about intelligence and giftedness have been challenged and changed by homeschooling my kids.

 

I really like what Gatto says: "Genius is as common as dirt." That's a constant reminder for me to believe in my kids and set my expectations high, even on days when they can't remember simple things like dirty dishes belong in the dishwasher and dirty laundry doesn't belong on the bathroom floor. :tongue_smilie:

Edited February 20, 2010 by LizzyBee

[LisaDSB]

Is this a misconception? If a child isn't gifted, then he or she likely will level out. Therefore, unless most of the kids at your children's Montessori school were gifted, then most of them would ultimately level out. (I actually know some people who spent a lot of money on Montessori pre-K & and K classes only to be disappointed that by 3rd grade the other kids had caught up. They were never sure if the money spent was worth it.)

 

I was just thinking about it from the lens of my own kids -- people assumed they were ahead simply because they went to Montessori and that it wouldn't last past grade 3. Maybe for more typical children there was a levelling effect.

[LisaDSB]

Funny thing is, I am the only one in my family that is "gifted", and I am so different in many other ways too... I always grew up feeling like I was looking in from the outside and understanding so much more than everyone else around me. It wasn't really until I met my husband (who is also gifted) in the middle school that I found someone who was on the same side of the window as me. Our childhoods are as opposite as night and day... and it wasn't "nurture" for me ;)

 

That was totally my experience too. They never knew what to make of me (and still don't), so it's nice to finally have a nuclear family where I "fit".

[LisaDSB]

I think genetics play an important role in giftedness, ...I really like what Gatto says: "Genius is as common as dirt." That's a constant reminder for me to believe in my kids and set my expectations high, even on days when they can't remember simple things like dirty dishes belong in the dishwasher and dirty laundry doesn't belong on the bathroom floor. :tongue_smilie:

 

Great post, Elizabeth. There is certainly more to people than meets the eye; and, there's a lot more to success than simply being smart. I keep telling my kids that -- the fact that they have good minds is simply the starting point. Now they need to exercise those brains, work hard, apply themselves and set goals to achieve. The Outliers does a great job of pointing out how many different factors go into a success story, and simply being gifted is never enough.

[AngieC]

I was just thinking about it from the lens of my own kids -- people assumed they were ahead simply because they went to Montessori and that it wouldn't last past grade 3. Maybe for more typical children there was a levelling effect.

 

Ah, got it. I misunderstood your original post. :)

[MaMa2005]

We have an interesting situation in our house with the nature vs. nurture question. DS was adopted from China at 26 months. He was totally non-verbal - to the point that our guide took us to the side and said she was really concerned that severe developmental deficits were present. We were noticing that he also rocked to the point that others were questioning whether or not he was autistic. While still in China, I started teaching him sign language which he picked up quickly.

 

We finally get back to the USA and immediately visit the ped. He says not to worry about anything for 6 months - then he would re-evalutate.

 

Well, the ped was correct in waiting. At 6 weeks home, when my son signed thank you for some water, I asked him to use his words. Out of his mouth pops, "Thank you MaMa" and then I asked him if he could talk. His answer, "Sure can, MaMa" and he hasn't been quiet since :D.

 

In the 2.5 years that we have been home, DS has been evaluated from top to bottom. He is on the cusp of highly/profoundly gifted. We found out that he was on the verge of 'institutionally induced autism' when we got him. Had he remained in the orphanage another 6 months, he probably would have become autistic. Yes, he still rocks but it has been determined that it is a self soothing behavior.

 

We have often asked ourselves what would have happened if he had landed in another family. Everyone in our family are educators - I'm a retired SPED teacher with a Ph.D, DH is a HS teacher and college professor with a Ph.D, grandparents are college professors with Ph.Ds. - you get the picture.

 

We expected a great deal from DS from the beginning. Is it nurture or are his birth parents gifted? From all that has gone on, I lean toward the nurture side. But will we ever know for sure?

[Happy2BaMom]

A few months ago, I read that intelligence and achievement are on the decline because very young children are spending too much time in structured learning environments such as preschool, and not enough time playing. The point of the study was that our young children need to dream and imagine and create, rather than being rushed from one structured activity to the next or taught to read or add at age 3. Although, as Seinfeld would say, "Not that there's anything wrong with that!" I have one that was reading, adding, subtracting, and begging to do school by age 4, so I get that some kids are ready for that.

 

I'll also try a general search for it...I'd love to have it for reference!

[Happy2BaMom]

....is that this is when you can distinguish to truly academically gifted versus those who are 'just' bright...the truly AG will continue to accelerate (assuming they are not held down by the usual school classroom, of course) and can actually pick up speed in their rate of acceleration, in terms of what they can handle with amount of material, depth of material, grade level of material, etc.

 

Given that the truly academically gifted are usually considered to be the top 2% (or so)....however you chose to measure that....it seems somewhat apparent that, if 98% of children are evening out somehow, that people would assume they "all level out".

 

Please note *I do not know if this is true*, the psychologist who tested my son & who has had a lot of training in academic giftedness told me.

[swellmomma]

I do think there is more to the nature side of giftedness than nurture. I have 4 kids, 3 have disabilities(2 confirmed- 1 of which may be 2E, 1 to begin testing), the 4th so far appears to be gifted. They have all had pretty much the same upbringing with few differences. The main difference is paternal lines. If it is a nurture situation than all 4 kids should be roughly the same. Not on different ends of the spectrum this way. None of them is average. Just as I believe that kids are born with LD like ADHD, I believe children are born gifted or not.

[Willow]

I may be alone here, but i think there are 2 types of gifted, and one can be taught.

 

These name are my names for it....i have done no research. Type 1 is 'academic' gifted. These kids are several grades ahead, work hard and enjoy schoolwork, they can be accelerated at school although my experience is that this is not always a good idea, they can also be easily 'hothoused' and often enjoy being pushed to a new level. Their natural gift is towards academics, this is quickly spotted and nurtured by parents and schools. My eldest is like this.

 

The other sort of gifted is what I call 'wacky' gifted. These kids seem to think sideways, and arrive at conclusions intuitively. They sometimes seem to do poorly in school or homeschool particularly in the early years, they don't seem to care about writing neatly or reading at this stage, although once they realize the usefulness of reading they go from no-reading to chapter books in 3 months flat and without seeming to need phonics etc. they then become avid readers, but are poor spellers and writers.

 

As they get older they continually see right to the heart of a problem, they do maths without the workings and they think sideways and around corners. they are the one whom, when you are reading history to them come out with a profound question about science....and can still tell you what you just read in history! They often hate schoolwork, and test poorly. Yet they come out with the really profound and innovative ideas. They are quick on the uptake and often have highly a developed sense of humour.

I have 2 like this. Both with IQ score out of the ball park, both not identified at school...in fact both put in slow learning groups!

 

I think the first kind can be taught with early learning, then second kind is destroyed by it!

 

Please note this is just personal observation! Obviously other peoples experiences will be different.

 

Willow

[lionfamily1999]

I think that "average" is a lot higher than people think. Iow, I think that given the right circumstances the possibilities are not as limited as one might think. I've coached soccer and had my six to eight yos weaving. They understood it and executed it beautifully, but normally would not have been taught such "advanced" tactics. They were capable of it, but weren't given the chance.

 

I know that "gifted" people don't always live up to their potential, at least in ways that society would agree with ;) Some of this can be from environment/nurture, the same way it could for "average" people. It could also be, because they ultimately get to decide what they do with their brains. How they define success has a lot to do with it, as well as their capacity for lazy.

 

That being said, both "average" and "gifted" people, imho, are capable of limitless possibilities if they're willing to do the work. Poor kids living in orphanages can still be gifted and rich kids with tutors for every subject and money coming out their ears can be average. I don't think their living situations can alter their iqs, but it can limit how much they do with it, if they ultimately allow it to.

Edited February 23, 2010 by lionfamily1999

[PeterPan]

Willow, that first type of dc was gifted, and if you put them in a different environment, one with less resources, it would come out different ways or with more resourcefulness and drive to use whatever was available. The school didn't create it but just brought it out.

 

That 2nd type of kid just has a very different gifting. My dd is like that, and I think the combo you described is pretty common, if you watch the boards enough. I was thinking just today how she is actually speeding up and becoming MORE intense, not less.

 

I think there are articles on different categories of giftedness (interpersonal, kinesthetic, etc.). I just figure she's different from me in that respect.

[Willow]

Willow, that first type of dc was gifted, and if you put them in a different environment, one with less resources, it would come out different ways or with more resourcefulness and drive to use whatever was available. The school didn't create it but just brought it out.

 

 

 

Yes, I agree, its just that that one got all the prizes, accolades etc, the youngest two got put in the special needs group.

 

Oldest was reading at 3 (didn't talk until 3 then it was apparent she was also reading so don't actually know when she learnt) and had "Children of Cherry tree farm" for a 5th birthday present, ID'ed as gifted the day she walked through the school door.

 

I think the second kind is often overlooked...but maybe its because i feel i am in that group. ;)

[LizzyBee]

I'll also try a general search for it...I'd love to have it for reference!

 

It was just a headline on yahoo or somewhere that I clicked on and read, but didn't save. Sorry!

[katilac]

Another interesting read is Torey Hayden's "One Child," a book about a young girl from the most horrible kind of poverty and parenting you can imagine. When Torey Hayden, a special ed teacher, got this child she was six, and her IQ score on a test Hayden gave her turned out to be a nearly unimaginable 182.

 

fyi, you can read a quick update on this child and several others from the book here:

 

http://www.torey-hayden.com/one_child.htm

[IsabelC]

I concur with much of what has already been said.

 

On the 'nurture' aspect, I was also reminded of that very famous study where children were randomly grouped, with some being labeled as gifted on the list given to the class teacher. By the end of a year, the 'gifted' children were significantly outperforming the others, caused purely by the teacher's attitude towards them.

[jonnia]

Here is some interesting information on research of physical brain differences, including links to more information:

 

What Brain Imaging Shows Us About Gifted Learners

[zaichiki]

Here is some interesting information on research of physical brain differences, including links to more information:

 

What Brain Imaging Shows Us About Gifted Learners

 

Thanks! Very interesting. It's just this quote that got me, though.

 

"Yet when you're around these kids, you just know there's something different, significantly different, about the way they function, think, and learn."

 

It was never apparent to me or my dh, until we had the IQ numbers. Maybe it's just because so many people in our family function, think, and learn differently too? Maybe it doesn't seem significantly different to us? We really didn't see any significant differences until people started pointing it out to us. As they got older (6+) it was more obvious in side-by-side situations with other kids their age, but our kids still seemed normal to us. (We did sometimes wonder why the other kids seemed to function, think, and learn so differently. Ha!)

[PeterPan]

Well not to be tacky, but nothing says ps gifted teachers are gifted, kwim?